I do not mean to be noisy or anything it just I never recall you ever speaking about your own gaming experience. Do you have a preference or specialty in the gaming field? Do you gamble in any capacity?
Printable View
I do not mean to be noisy or anything it just I never recall you ever speaking about your own gaming experience. Do you have a preference or specialty in the gaming field? Do you gamble in any capacity?
You are being noisy...you have always been noisy.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
I'm happy to demonstrate my gambling capacity, preferences and specialties in person.
But you have to ask me nicely.
I should have known better than to ask you those questions.
If you were really interested, then you wouldn't hesitate to my witness my play.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Members are falling all over each other trying to get a look at MDawg's play, what's your problem with watching mine?
I'll teach you a lesson for sure.
I think that even MDawg would pause and stop counting his little ketchup bottles if you started talking about your AP plays.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach bellyIf you were really interested, then you wouldn't hesitate to my witness my play.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Members are falling all over each other trying to get a look at MDawg's play, what's your problem with watching mine?
I'm either going to have to pay for the lesson one way or another. As I do not want a boxing lesson at my age.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
I would never talk about my AP plays. I've read that's frowned upon in this community.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
The rates are age-based. How old are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Put it this way coach I hope that you are in good health and wealth.
In the past Coach has made assertions that he believes 98% video poker can be beaten.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
And "Rob Singer" has done the same...about a thousand times. Of course, that was only cover for his AP play. And of course, five years from now, we may learn that his double up bug claim with the systems cover story was really a cover story for a better system that was so good he had to use the double up bug claim to hide the fact that his secret system was so much better than his various publicly reported systems. And I need to watch Victor/Victoria again so I can keep up.
But back to coach. People making paranormal claims often use coach's posting style. Let me explain. Paranormal claimants rarely, if ever, actually venture into the math itself. Their claims rarely crunch numbers unless it's to ask rhetorically how many sessions would be required to hit a "long term" that would squeeze claims into a well nigh impossible category. Instead, they argue that all things are possible, with "possible" somehow translating into, "How dare you impugn my integrity by suggesting I'm lying about a 1 in 1000 claim?" So what paranormal claimants offer are "philosophies of math" rather than math itself. If something isn't impossible, then it becomes, rhetorically at least, possible, and instead of presenting, "There's a 99.9% chance of this" versus "There's a .1% chance of that" the entire presentation becomes one of impossible on one side and possible on the other. "Possible" becomes the "good guy," the side of truth and justice and human abilities and the human spirit with a dose of discipline and family values conquering the profane math and so on. "Singer" has, of course, spouted these things on many occasions. In gambling, "possible" also implies that no matter what beatings one has privately taken from negative games, one can keep playing with the hope of turning it all around.
Thus, stone cold impossible becomes ruled out. In the meantime, the possible (and also extremely unlikely) is not consistently tagged with math. So no consistent math references with math used adjectivally, as in .1% chance of this or .003% chance of that. Instead, the emphasis is on the verbiage of "possible."
The entire debate swivels away from probability and into the realm of morality and philosophy. Calling someone a liar becomes reason for pistols at dawn, rather than the sheer improbability of an event becoming reason to define someone as delusional. Instead of highly probabilistically unlikely claims requiring high standards of proof, the claims are considered testament and proof in themselves to the reality.
It's an old claimant presentation style, and what never, ever happens is that the claimant passes any rigorous mathematical test. So people who claim to have done something, when tested, inevitably fail, even though the mathematical possibility exists that they could succeed. The mathematical possibility also exists that they had reported reality -- they were just experiencing one of those once-in-a-lifetime streaks. But somehow, when the spotlight is on them, their abilities become "shy," to use a term from paranormal research, and their abilities fade into the realm of anecdotal history.
Usually, they know how it will all end, so they delay having that spotlight on them as long as possible, creating hoops and drawbacks and delays, all while sucking up the attention and publicity inherent in announcements of spotlight proceedings without ever actually stepping into it.
It's an old style. No adjectival math attached to claims, very few specific math references at all, everything is about defining things as "possible" as opposed to "probable," and evading the testing spotlight like the chicken being chased by Rocky Balboa.
The only thing coach has an advantage at is in being a retard!
In short, recreational gamblers believe is possibilities while professional gamblers rely on probabilities.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
And "Rob Singer" has done the same...about a thousand times. Of course, that was only cover for his AP play. And of course, five years from now, we may learn that his double up bug claim with the systems cover story was really a cover story for a better system that was so good he had to use the double up bug claim to hide the fact that his secret system was so much better than his various publicly reported systems. And I need to watch Victor/Victoria again so I can keep up.
But back to coach. People making paranormal claims often use coach's posting style. Let me explain. Paranormal claimants rarely, if ever, actually venture into the math itself. Their claims rarely crunch numbers unless it's to ask rhetorically how many sessions would be required to hit a "long term" that would squeeze claims into a well nigh impossible category. Instead, they argue that all things are possible, with "possible" somehow translating into, "How dare you impugn my integrity by suggesting I'm lying about a 1 in 1000 claim?" So what paranormal claimants offer are "philosophies of math" rather than math itself. If something isn't impossible, then it becomes, rhetorically at least, possible, and instead of presenting, "There's a 99.9% chance of this" versus "There's a .1% chance of that" the entire presentation becomes one of impossible on one side and possible on the other. "Possible" becomes the "good guy," the side of truth and justice and human abilities and the human spirit with a dose of discipline and family values conquering the profane math and so on. "Singer" has, of course, spouted these things on many occasions. In gambling, "possible" also implies that no matter what beatings one has privately taken from negative games, one can keep playing with the hope of turning it all around.
Thus, stone cold impossible becomes ruled out. In the meantime, the possible (and also extremely unlikely) is not consistently tagged with math. So no consistent math references with math used adjectivally, as in .1% chance of this or .003% chance of that. Instead, the emphasis is on the verbiage of "possible."
The entire debate swivels away from probability and into the realm of morality and philosophy. Calling someone a liar becomes reason for pistols at dawn, rather than the sheer improbability of an event becoming reason to define someone as delusional. Instead of highly probabilistically unlikely claims requiring high standards of proof, the claims are considered testament and proof in themselves to the reality.
It's an old claimant presentation style, and what never, ever happens is that the claimant passes any rigorous mathematical test. So people who claim to have done something, when tested, inevitably fail, even though the mathematical possibility exists that they could succeed. The mathematical possibility also exists that they had reported reality -- they were just experiencing one of those once-in-a-lifetime streaks. But somehow, when the spotlight is on them, their abilities become "shy," to use a term from paranormal research, and their abilities fade into the realm of anecdotal history.
Usually, they know how it will all end, so they delay having that spotlight on them as long as possible, creating hoops and drawbacks and delays, all while sucking up the attention and publicity inherent in announcements of spotlight proceedings without ever actually stepping into it.
It's an old style. No adjectival math attached to claims, very few specific math references at all, everything is about defining things as "possible" as opposed to "probable," and evading the testing spotlight like the chicken being chased by Rocky Balboa.
Redietz wrote:
"It's an old style. No adjectival math attached to claims, very few specific math references at all, everything is about defining things as "possible" as opposed to "probable," and evading the testing spotlight like the chicken being chased by Rocky Balboa."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSdP7pbvDGU
Or: Play time vs. Work time.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I guess that's the difference between guys like me and you.
I gamble for shits and giggles; you're in it to earn your daily bread.
When I lose (happens a lot) I shrug and say "Oh well, it was spare money anyway, I'm financially well-heeled and need to spend it on something so who cares, really?" whereas if you lose it's more like "Fuck me, it's back to dumpster diving til the tide turns."
When gambling is an existential event people have to take it more seriously to help ensure their survival; for me it's a mindless albeit stimulating diversion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
What a lousy post MisterV.
You apparently know mickeycrimm's financial position in life. He very well may be sitting better than you are.
Mathematicians within the community have analyzed and explained that neither Singer's nor MDawg's claims are within the realm of the paranormal.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The results that our fellow members reported were found to be not extraordinary.
The math guys took it upon themselves to investigate the claims, I did not petition or encourage them to do so.
Dream on.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
While i salute Mr. Crimm for his knowledge of the games he plays I do not believe that slot hustling (no aspersions intended) is the road to riches.
I took the more traditional route to accumulate my fair share of the pie.
I believe that guys like me, well educated, white collar professional guys who played the traditional game of life correctly and who stayed out of trouble and kept their nose to the grindstone, are likely better off (cash, bank accounts, stocks, annuities, real estate etc.) than all but a few AP's.
Not saying I am a better person.
I don't recall making that assertion, but I won't insist it's not possible that I did.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Many problems with this post by coach. Allow me, if you will, to "play coach."Quote:
Originally Posted by coach bellyMathematicians within the community have analyzed and explained that neither Singer's nor MDawg's claims are within the realm of the paranormal.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The results that our fellow members reported were found to be not extraordinary.
The math guys took it upon themselves to investigate the claims, I did not petition or encourage them to do so.
First of all, we have the "mathematicians within the community" phrase. LOL. What community are you referring to, coach? Name the mathematicians, please, so we can ask them directly. I don't recall anyone saying either person's claims were "not in the realm of the paranormal." Please point out where that particular phrase was used, if you please.
I also never said Mdawg's or Singer's claims for their PAST was paranormal. What I said was that they claim a PAST, and then going FORWARD, they claim they can do the same thing. The claim that they have a way to duplicate the PAST while GOING FORWARD is what is paranormal. And it can be tested. And it won't be.
For example, coach, have you tallied how many sessions MDawg has won consecutively? MDawg can claim whatever he pleases. Good for him. But I assert that he can't do the same going forward.
Now, as an analogy, I won 17 consecutive against-the-spread in a public contest about 10 years ago (a contest I did not win, by the way, despite a 66-34 ATS record). The odds against doing that were the same as someone dying-by-reptile. I did it; it's in the books. Turns out it's not all that uncommon, as some offshores offered "streak rewards" for winning a certain number of consecutive against-the-spread games, and the biggest rewards were for winning 21 in a row. People actually did it on occasion. But that happens when you have 30,000 people on sites betting every day. Eventually long shots happen. People win the lottery.
But can I win 17 against-the-spread in a row GOING FORWARD? Well, in "coachspeak," I can (theoretically); it's possible. But I will not. I will never do that again. The claim that I can duplicate that, on command, is ludicrous. Absurd. Dumb as rocks. Possible? Oh, sure. But dumb as rocks to assert I will do that.
If MDawg were tested, he's not going to do this never losing stuff GOING FORWARD. And he's not going to be able to demonstrate streaks like he's reported when there are witnesses. That would be paranormal.
See, the debunking isn't historical debunking of past claims. The debunking is the unveiling that the person with the past claims does not have abilities enabling them to do their alleged thing going forward. Once that is demonstrated, then their past claims become just anecdotal curiosities, like winning lotteries.
Coach pointing out that Lloyd's chances aren't paranormal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqdNe8u-Jsg
Bosox,,,,, were you in the slow kid classes in school?Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSoxQuote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
What a lousy post MisterV.
You apparently know mickeycrimm's financial position in life. He very well may be sitting better than you are.
Perhaps not one of his claims in and of itself. the totality of claims are ludicrous. Here is a gem from today.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach bellyMathematicians within the community have analyzed and explained that neither Singer's nor MDawg's claims are within the realm of the paranormal.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The results that our fellow members reported were found to be not extraordinary.
The math guys took it upon themselves to investigate the claims, I did not petition or encourage them to do so.
Quote: MDawg
"There are exceptions. Last trip I had this shoe where I won almost every hand in shoe (minus ties) after I arrived about 15 hands into the shoe, and betting just two hundred a hand I won over ten grand."
Quote: Sabor "So after skipping the first 15 hands you must have played around 70 hands. 10k winner @ $200/hand means you net 50 wins.
Let's assume you won 60 hands then and lost 10 to accomplish this.
1 - BINOMDIST(60,70,.51,TRUE) = 1.80381E-10
Wow, a 5.5 billion to 1 event. Pretty improbable for mere mortals, but I'm sure to you it's just another Tuesday.
Stay hydrated."
Other then his BJ knowledge, he's not the sharpest tool in the shed. Many times saying things that are asinine.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenBosox,,,,, were you in the slow kid classes in school?Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSoxQuote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
What a lousy post MisterV.
You apparently know mickeycrimm's financial position in life. He very well may be sitting better than you are.
Sorry to jump in here, Red, but the "mathematicians" referenced are Wizard and Eliot, both of whom I have great respect and admiration for their math abilities. But let's clarify what was said and occurred.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Wizard: Mdawg privately contacts Wizard more often than most people take a crap. It is usually to bitch and whine like a girl, and try to get people suspended. But on at least one occasion (likely far more) that contact was to manipulate Wizards opinion. It occurred just after Wizard stated that it was time for Mdawg "to put up or shut up", I believe in December.
Mdawg manipulated Wizard by telling him, he (mdawg) uses a $500k line of credit to leverage against small wins each day. When you consider that, yeah, it seems possible that a player could extract quite a number of small wins, before it all collapses. Problem is in Mdawgs "writings" there is no mention of credit lines anywhere close to that amount. He talks about taking credit in $8000 range. So if Wizard were to re-calculate based on the smaller credit lines that Mdawg actually talks about, then all these frequent wins, becomes much less "possible"....into the "impossible" range really. I know Mike is not going to like it when I say Mdawg is manipulating him, but that is in fact what is occurring, including with all the crying and whining.
Now Eliot is a little different. Eliot is just a pure math geek and I don't mean that as an insult. He takes emotion completely out of it and just looks at the math. So Eliot concluded that the likelihood of Mdawgs claims where 1 in 600. And THAT was before this current trip of 10 more straight winning-every-session, winning-every-day was added in.
Now lets be clear 1 in 600 (much higher including these latest claims from this trip) for any reasonable person, means it didn't happen. But Mdawg has taken that 1 in 600 and says, "see it is possible". Shades of the Dumb and Dumber movie, where the girl puts the odds of them being together at 1 in a million and the response it "so you are telling me there is a chance". That is Mdawg....he is one of the dumb and dumber guys.
You only think it's great because they wrote it about about you....Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Ooh, Jackie Blue
Lives his life from inside of his room
You like your life in a free-form style
You'll take an inch but you'd love a mile
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenBosox,,,,, were you in the slow kid classes in school?Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSoxQuote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
What a lousy post MisterV.
You apparently know mickeycrimm's financial position in life. He very well may be sitting better than you are.
Let's just say I did not like MisterV's insulting behavior or his bragging.
More of a truism than insulting / bragging.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
C'mon, man: get real.
Who do you think has acquired more money / assets: me, a guy who worked 40 years as a lawyer, who invested, saved, and stayed out of trouble, or Mickey, a slot AP who not too terribly long ago might have been described as a hobo?
Hello, cold light of reality piercing through the bullshit veil ...
I'm not concerned with whatever claims going FORWARD you ascribe to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
That's your peculiar obsession, not mine.
I'm addressing the insistence that they are lying about their PAST results.
Then we are in agreement...it seems that you see things my way.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I used to be in gambling to earn my daily bread.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Then I was in gambling to bank up as much money as possible before I got to old.
Now, I still gamble for something to do but don't need the money anymore. I'm set for life. You know, like all those working stiffs that retire after 40 years of work.
About losing? Fuck, I never had a losing year. Never came close. Making money was always routine to me. There's no losing in gambling. At least not for me. Where'd you come up with that shit?
Rob Singer's negative expectation plays weren't so negative. He played games well above 99% with cashback/bounceback. Triple Bonus Poker Plus is a 99.8% game. Sure, he said he could beat the lower paybacks but he never played them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mission146
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
You see MisterV you don't have all the answers. And I still see you as an insulting/bragging rude man.
And I see you as a dolt with blinders on.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
My post was not intended to insult Mr. Crimm, whom I rather admire, actually, given the adversity he overcame to get where he is today.
Rather I mentioned him as an example; choose your typical AP, then put him / her into the scenario I mentioned.
If you still don't get it, well, there's no cure for either cupidity or stupidity.
Again, I'm not saying I am better than your average AP; I am saying that your average white collar professional attorney is likely better off financially at retirement age than is your average AP, whatever / whomever that may be.
Now let's factor in Social Security (not SSDI or SSI): I wonder how many lifelong AP's are drawing close to $3K a month Social Security when they hit retirement age?
Is it rude to speak the truth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
MaxPen, recently made a reference that was similar to this one which I think was very meaningful. It is not how much you have but how much you need. Bottom line here is living within your means, which can be deceptive depending upon where you live can and does make a huge difference.
In post #26 MisterV you are still being rude with this quote:
How people are described here is often based on alliances, or may in fact be something so far in the past tense is ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Perhaps, but there's a thing called correct strategy that goes along with that payback :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Who is in an alliance with Mr V ?Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
I don't understand the formula, can you explain it in layman's terms?Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
How does this formula apply to the shoe that MDawg posted the scoreboard photo for,
and how he claims he bet for that shoe?
It seems that you are certain that he could not have won for that shoe as he claims.
Did he take a photo of a scoreboard, and then create a story about how he played it?
Or did he create the story first, and then find a scoreboard to match the story?
The 9 inch pedestal Man Servant put Rob up on trumps that. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfPerhaps, but there's a thing called correct strategy that goes along with that payback :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Nobody likes meQuote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Everybody hates me
I guess I'll go eat worms
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elttaWchFQo
I like you but maybe that's because I like Mad Magazine.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Having dealt with lawyers in general they are pretty much scumbags. They play the truth as told game where they leave out as much as possible, from anything they say.
Perhaps that is a form of advantage play but my experience is most AP's target the system, the big guys, while lawyers will shit on anyone
I've known lots of people with JDs.. they really never struck me as being any different than other "professional" people. Weird.
Yep, but Rob did play optimal strategy except for those "special plays" which will definitely cut some of the payback. But even with the special plays it wasn't chopping that much off. Much of the stuff he did, according to him, was conditional. Would the hit put him at or above his stop win was his rule for whether or not he made a lot of those special plays.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfPerhaps, but there's a thing called correct strategy that goes along with that payback :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Per the usual you insult yourself. You just can't be taken as a serious AP. You are definitely a Poser Pro. MAXPEN THE POSER PRO. You don't understand AP, you just do the monkey see monkey do thing while standing around acting like you know what the fuck is going on. You give blowjobs to AP's so they will point out plays to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenThe 9 inch pedestal Man Servant put Rob up on trumps that. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfPerhaps, but there's a thing called correct strategy that goes along with that payback :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Anyone with any brains can see that playing a 99.8% game with cashback/bounceback, which in those days was damn good, is not a losing scenario even with "special plays" in the mix. But not MAXPEN THE POSER PRO. You can't even be honest about it. You've got it in your head that everything written about Singer must be negative without any concern for the truth.
Its really sad how you've turned out. Your Singer obsession has destroyed your reputation. And you've exposed yourself as a poser pro.
You have turned into such a liar Mickeycrimm in your effort to support Singer. For years Rob attacked players for doing what you just described, playing slightly -Ev games and using the mailers, bounce back cash and point multiplier to turn the play +EV. He said he didn't need the players club/players card to win and anyone who did was weak. It came across that he didn't even understand the advantage of player club. He claimed he won without even using a players card. Now in defense of him, you say the opposite. Dementia is either setting in or you are flat out intentionally lying. It is you trying to rewrite history, reality and facts and everyone knows it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I know, you will call me names now, just like you do everyone else, because that is all you have now.
And by the way, YES Rob often bragged about playing and winning on 98% games. Again, you are lying and trying to re-write history.
Well,,, since I am monkey doing stuff that I have yet to see or run into anyone doing. I will live with being called an amateur. Especially by a dumb ass hobo nickel scrounging vulture like yourself. Have fun jerking yourself off to delusions of grandeur in your rented room during retirement. Or did you upgrade to a rented apartment?...lolQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmPer the usual you insult yourself. You just can't be taken as a serious AP. You are definitely a Poser Pro. MAXPEN THE POSER PRO. You don't understand AP, you just do the monkey see monkey do thing while standing around acting like you know what the fuck is going on. You give blowjobs to AP's so they will point out plays to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenThe 9 inch pedestal Man Servant put Rob up on trumps that. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
Anyone with any brains can see that playing a 99.8% game with cashback/bounceback, which in those days was damn good, is not a losing scenario even with "special plays" in the mix. But not MAXPEN THE POSER PRO. You can't even be honest about it. You've got it in your head that everything written about Singer must be negative without any concern for the truth.
Its really sad how you've turned out. Your Singer obsession has destroyed your reputation. And you've exposed yourself as a poser pro.
The only one destroying their reputation is you. Which Crimm should people believe regarding Singer, the vitriolic drunk hobo or the knob polishing Man Servant?
You are the one obsessed with Singer. I hardly bring him up. I sent his ass packing. Something you couldn't accomplish in a decade. He is gone. Because he knows that he is completely full of shit. Pretty sure you're now bitter as fuck that you cucked out to him.
In fact, one of the points I made quite a few times was that a "Singer" type profile (impulsive, martingale, big bankroll, erratic play volume) would benefit people with comps and free play. "Singer," however, berated people for counting such things formally in their analyses of what to play where. I halfway agreed with him since free play and comps could be pulled out from under a player at any time. Sports book players, for example, sometimes had their banked comps radically reduced or zeroed out after ownership changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou have turned into such a liar Mickeycrimm in your effort to support Singer. For years Rob attacked players for doing what you just described, playing slightly -Ev games and using the mailers, bounce back cash and point multiplier to turn the play +EV. He said he didn't need the players club/players card to win and anyone who did was weak. It came across that he didn't even understand the advantage of player club. He claimed he won without even using a players card. Now in defense of him, you say the opposite. Dementia is either setting in or you are flat out intentionally lying. It is you trying to rewrite history, reality and facts and everyone knows it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I know, you will call me names now, just like you do everyone else, because that is all you have now.
And by the way, YES Rob often bragged about playing and winning on 98% games. Again, you are lying and trying to re-write history.
I have debunked "Singer" a long time and do not recall him ever mentioning comps or free play as part of any equation to turn a negative game positive. I honestly don't remember him posting anything like that even once.
But mickey has had private conversations with "Singer," so perhaps "Singer" said things to mickey that contradict the posts or the videos.
You're as bad as maxpen the poser pro, KJocchio You are a BORN a liar. You don't care about the truth. You only care about bashing Singer. You get your jollies off doing it. Facts go out the window with you as long as what you write is anti-Singer. You have no scruples with the truth. The truth should not be anti-Singer or pro-Singer. YOU CAN'T DO IT. It's why your opinions on the matter are shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou have turned into such a liar Mickeycrimm in your effort to support Singer. For years Rob attacked players for doing what you just described, playing slightly -Ev games and using the mailers, bounce back cash and point multiplier to turn the play +EV. He said he didn't need the players club/players card to win and anyone who did was weak. It came across that he didn't even understand the advantage of player club. He claimed he won without even using a players card. Now in defense of him, you say the opposite. Dementia is either setting in or you are flat out intentionally lying. It is you trying to rewrite history, reality and facts and everyone knows it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I know, you will call me names now, just like you do everyone else, because that is all you have now.
And by the way, YES Rob often bragged about playing and winning on 98% games. Again, you are lying and trying to re-write history.
Yes, Singer denounced cashback/comp/freeplay. But do you think he passed it by? Let the casino keep it? If you do you are a bigger idiot than I thought.
You really need to get help. You are obviously mentally disturbed.
I definitely hit a nerve, didn't I? maxpen the poser pro has never contributed anything meaningful on VCT. NEVER. He hangs around like he's some sort of AP. Do you recall him adding anything of value in a discussion about a play? He's here to leech off others. Whats extremely funny is his delusions of grandeur has him thinking he has ruined Singer. It's just the opposite. maxpen the poser pro ruined himself here. He showed his lowlife true colors. No redeeming qualities.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenWell,,, since I am monkey doing stuff that I have yet to see or run into anyone doing. I will live with being called an amateur. Especially by a dumb ass hobo nickel scrounging vulture like yourself. Have fun jerking yourself off to delusions of grandeur in your rented room during retirement. Or did you upgrade to a rented apartment?...lolQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmPer the usual you insult yourself. You just can't be taken as a serious AP. You are definitely a Poser Pro. MAXPEN THE POSER PRO. You don't understand AP, you just do the monkey see monkey do thing while standing around acting like you know what the fuck is going on. You give blowjobs to AP's so they will point out plays to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Anyone with any brains can see that playing a 99.8% game with cashback/bounceback, which in those days was damn good, is not a losing scenario even with "special plays" in the mix. But not MAXPEN THE POSER PRO. You can't even be honest about it. You've got it in your head that everything written about Singer must be negative without any concern for the truth.
Its really sad how you've turned out. Your Singer obsession has destroyed your reputation. And you've exposed yourself as a poser pro.
The only one destroying their reputation is you. Which Crimm should people believe regarding Singer, the vitriolic drunk hobo or the knob polishing Man Servant?
You are the one obsessed with Singer. I hardly bring him up. I sent his ass packing. Something you couldn't accomplish in a decade. He is gone. Because he knows that he is completely full of shit. Pretty sure you're now bitter as fuck that you cucked out to him.
And now for the third of The Three Stooges. I already took care of KJocchio and maxpen the poser pro. You have selective memory, comrade. Singer wrote many a story of taking comps/cashback/bounceback/freeplay over the years. Sure he denounced it but he didn't pass it up. He made a lot of brags about casinos sending him a shit ton of freeplay and room comp. You idiot Three Stooges even bashed him for frequently "dragging his wife" to those free casino vacations.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzIn fact, one of the points I made quite a few times was that a "Singer" type profile (impulsive, martingale, big bankroll, erratic play volume) would benefit people with comps and free play. "Singer," however, berated people for counting such things formally in their analyses of what to play where. I halfway agreed with him since free play and comps could be pulled out from under a player at any time. Sports book players, for example, sometimes had their banked comps radically reduced or zeroed out after ownership changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou have turned into such a liar Mickeycrimm in your effort to support Singer. For years Rob attacked players for doing what you just described, playing slightly -Ev games and using the mailers, bounce back cash and point multiplier to turn the play +EV. He said he didn't need the players club/players card to win and anyone who did was weak. It came across that he didn't even understand the advantage of player club. He claimed he won without even using a players card. Now in defense of him, you say the opposite. Dementia is either setting in or you are flat out intentionally lying. It is you trying to rewrite history, reality and facts and everyone knows it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I know, you will call me names now, just like you do everyone else, because that is all you have now.
And by the way, YES Rob often bragged about playing and winning on 98% games. Again, you are lying and trying to re-write history.
I have debunked "Singer" a long time and do not recall him ever mentioning comps or free play as part of any equation to turn a negative game positive. I honestly don't remember him posting anything like that even once.
But mickey has had private conversations with "Singer," so perhaps "Singer" said things to mickey that contradict the posts or the videos.
The only thing you have debunked is your knowledge on the subject.
All opinions on any subject should be unbiased. One must have a neutral perspective in evaluating anything. Its the only way to attain any kind of credibility. Not one of the Three Stooges can give an unbiased opinion on Singer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmAnd now for the third of The Three Stooges. I already took care of KJocchio and maxpen the poser pro. You have selective memory, comrade. Singer wrote many a story of taking comps/cashback/bounceback/freeplay over the years. Sure he denounced it but he didn't pass it up. He made a lot of brags about casinos sending him a shit ton of freeplay and room comp. You idiot Three Stooges even bashed him for frequently "dragging his wife" to those free casino vacations.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzIn fact, one of the points I made quite a few times was that a "Singer" type profile (impulsive, martingale, big bankroll, erratic play volume) would benefit people with comps and free play. "Singer," however, berated people for counting such things formally in their analyses of what to play where. I halfway agreed with him since free play and comps could be pulled out from under a player at any time. Sports book players, for example, sometimes had their banked comps radically reduced or zeroed out after ownership changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I have debunked "Singer" a long time and do not recall him ever mentioning comps or free play as part of any equation to turn a negative game positive. I honestly don't remember him posting anything like that even once.
But mickey has had private conversations with "Singer," so perhaps "Singer" said things to mickey that contradict the posts or the videos.
The only thing you have debunked is your knowledge on the subject.
All opinions on any subject should be unbiased. One must have a neutral perspective in evaluating anything. Its the only way to attain any kind of credibility. Not one of the Three Stooges can give an unbiased opinion on Singer.
You know, mickey, my post was gentle. Had not a single bad thing to say about you or "Singer." And this was your response.
"Singer" never used bounce back, comps, free vacations, or free play as part of any accounting to turn negative into positive games. He stated that he felt it was inappropriate, that it was sleazy, addiction-serving bookkeeping, and that people who did it were "weak" and looking for excuses. Why do you not take him at his word?
Why do you feel it appropriate to do something "Singer" publicly said was NOT appropriate in determining wins/losses?
What you are doing is publicly cherry-picking "Singer's" own words and his own strategies and using your knowledge and YOUR accounting (not "Singer's") to do accounting for him. Why didn't you include "Singer's" own quotes or own words as a basis for your argument?
Do you think "Singer" needs your accounting help? Why do you think that?
I just don't get it. For 20 years, "Singer" lambasted video poker players for slowly changing their accounting practices from straight wins/losses to including free play to including comps to including when they sold gifts and Tupperware they received from casinos.
I am biased here. I applauded "Singer" on many occasions -- a rarity -- for taking this stand. I thought "Singer's" "don't-count-junk" bookkeeping was a good idea. It didn't muddy waters because bounce-back could be cut any time, even after play losses, and comps/free play have never been locked up as if in a bank. And the Tupperware is crap.
Your taking this position says that you get to decide what should count as profit from "Singer's" play even though he expressly posted on dozens, if not hundreds, of occasions that he considered what you are doing wrong.
You are basically DEFENDING SINGER FROM HIMSELF.
I don't get it. Well, maybe I do, if you rely on this kind of bookkeeping yourself to sustain the narrative that you are profitable. Or if you are dead set to define "Singer" as an "AP" because that makes everything with him fine and dandy.
Just realize that you are expressly defending "Singer" by doing something he said was WRONG dozens if not hundreds of times. Why do that?
I don't understand why you think your accounting practices should override "Singer's" accounting practices. I'm reasonably certain "Singer" didn't keep tabs on free rooms and meal values to arrive at his bottom line. Why do you value your accounting over his?
Ignoring someone's own words to decide how they should do their bookkeeping is the very soul of bias. You value your opinion over his.
P.S. For the record, when I do my own video poker accounting, I add in free play value after the fact of having played it so I have an objective, not a theo, number. I count nothing else into my formal bookkeeping. I never count room or food values for anything. When I was betting sports in LV more than offshore, I received 20-some nights comped a year. That's down to about a dozen now. I am a very small, modest vp player. I play maybe 50 hours a year. I'm ahead roughly 6K lifetime.
redietz wrote:
"I'm reasonably certain "Singer" didn't keep tabs on free rooms and meal values to arrive at his bottom line."
Reasonably certain, bull crap, sounds like speculation to me.
What other AP's calculations methods used to get to a final tally, was not the way Singer wanted to be looked upon as being in the same boat publically. That is Singer only being Singer every time. However, you can bet your ass that he passed up on nothing, and that was just one of his many secrets.
I can assure you the feeling is quite mutual mickeycrimm. Your insane switch regarding Singer and you now distorting and re-writing history to suit your new boyfriend demonstrates a clear detachment from reality. And you obsession with gay sex acts is not normal either. It goes well beyond the juvenile name calling that kids do, which you use as an excuse. It really reveals who you are...insecure closet door and everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
What should be concerning to you is these opinions are shared by most here. And the same about MaxPen. Your opinions about MaxPen are shared by only you and a couple of the AP haters like blackhole. Everyone else, everyone normal knows Maxpen is a top AP. If blackhole shared my opinion about anything.....I think I would be very concerned. ;)
I believe Mickey's backing of Singer, is a combination of unwillingness to admit that he's wrong(extreme stubbornness) and his extreme hatred for Max, KJ and Comrade Dietz. Mickey is just to sharp in the AP department, to actually truly believe all of Singers nonsense and his continual defense of grandpa Newell. There are hundreds of posts of Mickey over a span of several years disproving and calling Singer a charlatan. He ultimately refuses to admit that he's wrong about the whole ordeal.
You took care of nobody, you old fool. All you have done is prove yourself, a once greatly respected and still somewhat respected AP, as delusional and obsessive in everything else. YOU and you alone are are making yourself irrelevant. You are a has been, old dude, running over peoples toes with your wheelchair and laughing. Shades of "get of my lawn sonny".Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
That is basically it. Mickey can't and won't admit what everyone knows....that he was wrong...that he was played by Singer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzy
That is tied to Mickey being a "trumper" which he tells us every chance he gets and inserts politics and Trump into every discussion. If in fact the hobo can read, he no doubt has read Trumps book and has extracted Trumps number 1 rule....never apologize or admit your were wrong. That rule was really about business and business dealings an negotiations. In real everyday life not admitting you were wrong when the whole world can see and knows you were just makes you look like an idiot, completely delusional. Being wrong is not a weakness. Circumstances change and successful people change along with them and alter their views and opinion with those changes. Idiots just hang on to their initial wrong stances like earth-is-flaters.
Seems to me, Mickey got hornswaggled like Alan did years ago. But as I recall, Mickey more or less just stated that he doesn't care whether Rob is a liar or not. I think he's shitting on you guys because you all keep arguing the same shit over and over. Alan got so wrapped up in Singers BS that he went out of his way to make videos of the BS'er. How anyone gets so suckered by these BS artists is incomprehensible.
Ozzy, you are completely off base here. Mickey is not backing Singer and he is not wrong he is right. I also do not believe that he hates anyone on the site.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzy
Again mickey is not defending Singer, nor does it mean that mickey believes Singer's story. All of that has nothing to do with what took place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzy
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Just wanted to mention that I'm a bit of a language precisionist, so most of what I say is usually laced with qualifiers as opposed to declarations (as this sentence is), so almost everything has a degree of speculation to it.
My opinion/speculation/me-being-reasonably-certain (as opposed to being certain or someone else being reasonably certain) is that if Singer at any point had amassed mass quantities of comps to which he had attached a value, it would have taken a herculean effort by him to not mention it at some point with a dollar figure attached. His Newell obsession and using price tags adjectivally in reference to the Newell (as my mom did with home decor in my youth -- "the $600 sofa" or the "$40 lamp") allows me to come to my speculative conclusion that had he kept tabs on his freebies, at some point in thousands of posts, he would have attached some kind of price tag to it or boasted about it or mentioned it in some concrete way.
Perhaps I'm wrong and "Singer" displayed the same discipline in not mentioning his comp values as he has in keeping silent about the double up bug or stifling his opinions of blacks, asians, and gays.
I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
And allow me to point out that in this kind of discussion, given BoSox's newbie status regarding all things "Singer," that BoSox's speculations regarding "Singer" are most likely (note the qualifier) more speculative than mine, to coin a phrase from Animal Farm.
You sir, might be able to analyze a blackjack table, but you are HORRENDOUS at reading the forums and people in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSoxOzzy, you are completely off base here. Mickey is not backing Singer and he is not wrong he is right. I also do not believe that he hates anyone on the site.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzy
Again mickey is not defending Singer, nor does it mean that mickey believes Singer's story. All of that has nothing to do with what took place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzy
What the hell does MaxPen being a top AP have to do with anything relevant to this dispute? Why did you even put that in your post? Right about now Blackhole's opinion stands up strong compared to yours. Yes, you think that MaxPen is a fine upstanding guy because he has done and thrown a few crumbs of what he has. Something that you chicken shit have been holding on to for who knows how long now and been sitting on the sidelines. All because you think it could possibly be doxing, and maybe breaking forum rules, or against the rules of where you obtained the information, etc, etc. That's okay you got good old Max to hopefully do all your dirty work. And you think your opinion is better than blackhole's yah right.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJEveryone else, everyone normal knows Maxpen is a top AP. If blackhole shared my opinion about anything.....I think I would be very concerned. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
My comments were a direct response to mickey's comments in post #47. Some have suggested YOU have a reading comprehension issue BoSox. I hate to say, it really is looking more and more like that is the case. You read what you want to read.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
And this says everything about your ability to judge people lately.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Mickey is getting pwned. It’s embarrassing.
Here is the actual quote that you copied from mickeycrimm to start your post"Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJMy comments were a direct response to mickey's comments in post #47. Some have suggested YOU have a reading comprehension issue BoSox. I hate to say, it really is looking more and more like that is the case. You read what you want to read.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
"You really need to get help. You are obviously mentally disturbed."
Taken from post #46, not #47 as you said. The point of fact is if your intent was to dispute a point made about MaxPen you should have included some kind of quote alluding to that fact asshole. Days often go by between responses.
Well days didn't go by in this case, asshole. The posts I was responding to were 3 or 4 posts above. And YOU are about the last person that should be giving anyone advice on quoting. More often than not on multiple forums, you seem unable to even figure out the quoting feature and instead retype what a person said. So take that, um....asshole.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSoxHere is the actual quote that you copied from mickeycrimm to start your post"Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJMy comments were a direct response to mickey's comments in post #47. Some have suggested YOU have a reading comprehension issue BoSox. I hate to say, it really is looking more and more like that is the case. You read what you want to read.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
"You really need to get help. You are obviously mentally disturbed."
Taken from post #46, not #47 as you said. The point of fact is if your intent was to dispute a point made about MaxPen you should have included some kind of quote alluding to that fact asshole. Days often go by between responses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Just wanted to mention that I'm a bit of a language precisionist, so most of what I say is usually laced with qualifiers as opposed to declarations (as this sentence is), so almost everything has a degree of speculation to it.
My opinion/speculation/me-being-reasonably-certain (as opposed to being certain or someone else being reasonably certain) is that if Singer at any point had amassed mass quantities of comps to which he had attached a value, it would have taken a herculean effort by him to not mention it at some point with a dollar figure attached. His Newell obsession and using price tags adjectivally in reference to the Newell (as my mom did with home decor in my youth -- "the $600 sofa" or the "$40 lamp") allows me to come to my speculative conclusion that had he kept tabs on his freebies, at some point in thousands of posts, he would have attached some kind of price tag to it or boasted about it or mentioned it in some concrete way.
Perhaps I'm wrong and "Singer" displayed the same discipline in not mentioning his comp values as he has in keeping silent about the double up bug or stifling his opinions of blacks, asians, and gays.
I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
And allow me to point out that in this kind of discussion, given BoSox's newbie status regarding all things "Singer," that BoSox's speculations regarding "Singer" are most likely (note the qualifier) more speculative than mine, to coin a phrase from Animal Farm.
Those are two very good points made redeitz. I did realize that I did not know about Singer's history as nearly as well as the rest of you. However, this discussion is not about whatever lies were made by Singer. I don't think that anyone disputes that he made plenty of those.
No re-typing on my part shit for brains.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJWell days didn't go by in this case, asshole. The posts I was responding to were 3 or 4 posts above. And YOU are about the last person that should be giving anyone advice on quoting. More often than not on multiple forums, you seem unable to even figure out the quoting feature and instead retype what a person said. So take that, um....asshole.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSoxHere is the actual quote that you copied from mickeycrimm to start your post"Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
"You really need to get help. You are obviously mentally disturbed."
Taken from post #46, not #47 as you said. The point of fact is if your intent was to dispute a point made about MaxPen you should have included some kind of quote alluding to that fact asshole. Days often go by between responses.
Oh my God, what is the matter with you? Seriously! It took all of 30 seconds to find these 3 examples where you "manually" quoted. I could find hundreds more, including examples on multiple sites.:rolleyes: Talk about "shit for brains".Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
Looks like he got you on that one, BoSox.
You might want to ramp up your attacks on KJ and turn into a rabid homophobe like some others have.
Not that it will do you any good on this forum, but you'll have new material to work with.
Remember: "Slurred lives matter."
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJWell days didn't go by in this case, asshole. The posts I was responding to were 3 or 4 posts above. And YOU are about the last person that should be giving anyone advice on quoting. More often than not on multiple forums, you seem unable to even figure out the quoting feature and instead retype what a person said. So take that, um....asshole.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSoxHere is the actual quote that you copied from mickeycrimm to start your post"Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
"You really need to get help. You are obviously mentally disturbed."
Taken from post #46, not #47 as you said. The point of fact is if your intent was to dispute a point made about MaxPen you should have included some kind of quote alluding to that fact asshole. Days often go by between responses.
Again no retyping I copy and paste. Yes, I am unfamiliar with some of the quoting features. So sometimes I look for shortcuts.
I really don't want to dwell on Singer. The character created, "Rob Singer" is now dead. The man that created the character, just now irrelevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoSox
But the history of the person cannot be ignored. If someone new had come to a forum and made the claim of the double up bug, while skeptical, I would give him the benefit of doubt, until I had reason not to. I and others might have questions and that might seem a little unfair, like an interrogation, but the magnitude of such a claim almost requires that.
BUT, when that same claim is made by a person, who has for 20 years lied and made false claim, you don't take him at his word. At that point the onus is on him to prove his claim. He created that lack of credibility. And that is the point I was trying to make to mickey several years ago. Consider the source and look into it. And if mickey had looked into it, like some of us did, he would have seen many things that don't add up as well as many things that just flat out contradict the possibility.
Google "narcissist". You will find numerous articles listing traits of a narcissist.
All contain common traits of lying for the need for attention. And they escalate these lies and claims when not receiving the attention desired.
They exaggerate their own smarts, success, power, and looks.
The lack of empathy leads them to take advantage of people, with no regrets.
Narcissists may be extremely jealous and ultra-sensitive.
Because they tend to be very thin-skinned, they may angrily lash out at any criticism or push-back.
Narcissists also may lash out when they feel like they’re not getting special treatment.
Underneath all of these traits is a deep sense of insecurity.
This is Rob (the person behind the character) to a tee. Bitter at his admitted failure as an AP and status as a degenerate losing gambler, he made up stories of success, long-term winning playing negative EV. Millions of dollars over 10 years, later amended to fit a new claim. When he was no longer getting the attention desired, he escalated his claim by stealing the double up bug. If any of it had been real there would have been no need for all the name calling and attacks that occurred for decades on numerous forums. But that kind of attacking back, deflecting is classic narcissistic behavior.
And now we see the exact same text book example of narcissist behavior from Mdawg. Honestly it is not just like watching a repeat, but a really BAD repeat.
I still claim BoSox was in the slow kids case at school. Maybe not quite a window licker on the special bus.
Go ahead have your fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
What were the specific claims analyzed?Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Was there anything deeper to the results of the analysis than not "within the realm of the paranormal"?
Those are good questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by tominnv
But, please...you first...
Quote:
Originally Posted by monet
I already let monet know the answers to his questions. If he would like me to expand further on what I told him, he knows how to reach me.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Which leads us to another question: Why are you hiding most everything involved in the mathematical analysis of MDawg's casino action?
I credited monet, but now it's my question too.Quote:
Originally Posted by tominnv
Please, no PMs I get too many already.
Just answer publicly and we can move on.
I'm hiding nothing involving the mathematical analysis of MDawg's action.
I can't...it's all a matter of public record.
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Now you should have no problems pointing out the public records of mathematicians analysis and explanation of MDawg's casino betting claims.
I seen my name and some questions.
I'm too busy (LAZY) to read through this thread and figure it out.
Ask me directly and I'll try to answer if I see the post.
I don't believe in the PM System but I do usually answer them.
I haven't had one for awhile.
The last one was Tasha agreeing with some post of mine.
Other than that it is usually people asking me about where the machines are.
I had a couple guys ask me to partner up on something but I deleted those and dismissed them.
I don't need no stinking partners.
Although, I would make some exceptions with certain members but probably just too busy to be bothered in the long run.
I got my own troubles.
kewlJ quoting me?
That seems odd!?
I thought she had me on ignore.
I can give a quick update of my last two days.
+3,170 dollars from machine play.
I played some 2 dollar BnsPkr Dlx and I played some 1 and 2 dollar Double Bonus Multi-Strike.
When you hear the free ride music you can sing the words: "You can't win."
The music and words fit perfectly not to mention you usually can't win.
I can't remember for sure but I think that game is 600 Variance or around that figure.
Yikes... as you youngins like to say!
In Negative Hockey Bets I had a couple Money Line Parlays that lost going 2-1 and 3-1 on each respectively.
I lost 1400 total on the 27th.
Today I bet the Capitals Money Line at -150.
900 to win 600 that I haven't cashed yet.
Waiting for the next bet to save travel time.
Gone are the days when I insisted on cashing out my tickets immediately.
That line was at -135 but by the time I got to the book it jumped up 15 points.
I guess everyone else was betting it too.
It was a bit painful deciding to bet on it at -150 but I took the plunge anyways.
The Rangers were on a back to back and had an inferior goalie in net.
The Caps decided to trick me with their goalie choice at the last second.
The Capitals tried to blow the game giving up 4 goals in the 3rd to win 5-4.
Good thing I didn't get greedy with the Puck Line this time as I usually do.
Laying 150 to win 100 probably isn't a positive play but it worked out this time.
Tomorrow I target Buffalo yet again.
However, I am worried they might break the losing streak against Philly this time.
I really like the Avs over the Ducks since the Ducks are on a back to back and on Colorado Home Ice.
I may just sit back and try to let my free play run dry.
I figure I can roll for 3 months or so and should collect about 45k in free play.
If I want to go camping or move to Missouri I need to let all free play go to 0.
I don't trust anyone to go pick it up for me and my wife refuses.
Try to leave me alone as I am still trying to put myself in the looney bin by researching Wall Tents, RVs and Farm Houses.
Decisions, Decisions.
You fucking idiot. Saying the cashback/bounceback/freeplay was not needed is one thing. Not collecting it is another. Use your fucking head for something besides a hat rack. You actually think Singer did not collect it? What an idiot. OH, and take your "I was gentle" bullshit and shove it up your ass, punk.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmAnd now for the third of The Three Stooges. I already took care of KJocchio and maxpen the poser pro. You have selective memory, comrade. Singer wrote many a story of taking comps/cashback/bounceback/freeplay over the years. Sure he denounced it but he didn't pass it up. He made a lot of brags about casinos sending him a shit ton of freeplay and room comp. You idiot Three Stooges even bashed him for frequently "dragging his wife" to those free casino vacations.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The only thing you have debunked is your knowledge on the subject.
All opinions on any subject should be unbiased. One must have a neutral perspective in evaluating anything. Its the only way to attain any kind of credibility. Not one of the Three Stooges can give an unbiased opinion on Singer.
You know, mickey, my post was gentle. Had not a single bad thing to say about you or "Singer." And this was your response.
"Singer" never used bounce back, comps, free vacations, or free play as part of any accounting to turn negative into positive games. He stated that he felt it was inappropriate, that it was sleazy, addiction-serving bookkeeping, and that people who did it were "weak" and looking for excuses. Why do you not take him at his word?
Why do you feel it appropriate to do something "Singer" publicly said was NOT appropriate in determining wins/losses?
What you are doing is publicly cherry-picking "Singer's" own words and his own strategies and using your knowledge and YOUR accounting (not "Singer's") to do accounting for him. Why didn't you include "Singer's" own quotes or own words as a basis for your argument?
Do you think "Singer" needs your accounting help? Why do you think that?
I just don't get it. For 20 years, "Singer" lambasted video poker players for slowly changing their accounting practices from straight wins/losses to including free play to including comps to including when they sold gifts and Tupperware they received from casinos.
I am biased here. I applauded "Singer" on many occasions -- a rarity -- for taking this stand. I thought "Singer's" "don't-count-junk" bookkeeping was a good idea. It didn't muddy waters because bounce-back could be cut any time, even after play losses, and comps/free play have never been locked up as if in a bank. And the Tupperware is crap.
Your taking this position says that you get to decide what should count as profit from "Singer's" play even though he expressly posted on dozens, if not hundreds, of occasions that he considered what you are doing wrong.
You are basically DEFENDING SINGER FROM HIMSELF.
I don't get it. Well, maybe I do, if you rely on this kind of bookkeeping yourself to sustain the narrative that you are profitable. Or if you are dead set to define "Singer" as an "AP" because that makes everything with him fine and dandy.
Just realize that you are expressly defending "Singer" by doing something he said was WRONG dozens if not hundreds of times. Why do that?
I don't understand why you think your accounting practices should override "Singer's" accounting practices. I'm reasonably certain "Singer" didn't keep tabs on free rooms and meal values to arrive at his bottom line. Why do you value your accounting over his?
Ignoring someone's own words to decide how they should do their bookkeeping is the very soul of bias. You value your opinion over his.
P.S. For the record, when I do my own video poker accounting, I add in free play value after the fact of having played it so I have an objective, not a theo, number. I count nothing else into my formal bookkeeping. I never count room or food values for anything. When I was betting sports in LV more than offshore, I received 20-some nights comped a year. That's down to about a dozen now. I am a very small, modest vp player. I play maybe 50 hours a year. I'm ahead roughly 6K lifetime.
The equation is pretty simple:
Game Payback = 99.8%
cashback/bounceback/freeplay = could be up to 1% or even better in those days
Newsflash, Comrade Punk. IT DON'T MAKE A FUCK WHAT SINGER WROTE ABOUT IT!!! THE MATH WON'T FUCKING CHANGE!!!
I'm sick and tired of ignorant motherfuckers like you deliberately spreading the disinformation that I support Singer. I make unbiased opinions on the matter. A sick piece of shit like you can't/won't/don't out of your sick ass mentally deranged hatred. Get help for you affliction.
Didn't quote you, you porky bastard. I quoted Bosox, who had manually quoted you. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by monet
And yes, blubber butt, I do have you on ignore. We all understand how that works, that I may still see some of your post both when others quote you and when I visit the site without being logged on, which is usually the case when I visit from my phone.
Anyway, I am not opposed to reading some of your posts, because unlike most of the others haters that post nothing useful, only hate, you sometimes post useful information, even financially beneficial information. Here this will really piss you off: within the last two weeks, I was having lunch at Victory Burger at Circa, which has quickly become one of my favorite places. While waiting for the order, I was scanning VCT on my phone, which meant you were unblocked. You had given out a couple hockey picks you liked, one was Tampa bay and I forget the other. Since I was right there at the sportsbook, I bet the puck line both games individually and won. You on the other hand did some kind of parley with I think two other teams, one of which only won by 1 and lost your ticket. I didn't bet a lot, but made 5 hundred and some. I also have won 2 bets against buffalo in the past couple weeks. I only get out once or twice a week so they have to be playing that day and I have to even remember to look. But you have been good for probably a grand for me this month. And every little bit helps, especially now, since I haven't yet returned to blackjack play. So thanks. ;)
Look at this idiot, KJocchio. In one sentence he accuses me of having a "new boyfriend." In the very next sentence he accuses me of being obsessed with gay acts. HERE'S THE FUCKING POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK. Bitch get your mouth out from around redietz' cock long enough to make a coherent thought. And it's not hard to tell you've been fucking maxpen again. Easy enough to do since you both live in Vegas.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI can assure you the feeling is quite mutual mickeycrimm. Your insane switch regarding Singer and you now distorting and re-writing history to suit your new boyfriend demonstrates a clear detachment from reality. And you obsession with gay sex acts is not normal either. It goes well beyond the juvenile name calling that kids do, which you use as an excuse. It really reveals who you are...insecure closet door and everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
What should be concerning to you is these opinions are shared by most here. And the same about MaxPen. Your opinions about MaxPen are shared by only you and a couple of the AP haters like blackhole. Everyone else, everyone normal knows Maxpen is a top AP. If blackhole shared my opinion about anything.....I think I would be very concerned. ;)
MAXPEN IS A POSER PRO. He hasn't contributed anything to AP discussion in the forums. He's just been in the forums to pick off information from the real pros on where the plays are. He's a monkey see monkey do guy.
And MDawg is right about you, KJocchio. You washed out as a blackjack player. You're a piece of shit bust out loser.