Documenting History

[quahaug]

Sorry Rob, this has nothing to do with your ongoing pissing match with Arci. Post a scan of any of your sch-c's as a professional gambler or run off with your tail between your legs. Your choice.

Robs silence is deafening.

[Rob.Singer]

There is nothing wrong with attacking the "AP approach" and of course you wouldn't name anyone in particular, nor would the publisher of GT allow you to. I hope redietz takes note of this.

But again, I caution you not claim that Arc backed out of the challenge. He did not.

I regularly named those AP's whom I blasted in the past, and the owner Chuck D. enjoyed every word. But I won't be doing that now.

Of course arci ran away from his own challenge like a coward tucking his tail between his legs, by taking no action after I gave him the two weeks to do so. I sent my form in, and that scared the daylights out of him. If he weren't looking for his usual escape route he'd have made his end happen just as I did mine. And that's exactly how the facts will be laid out, which can be validated by the link I'll provide to right here. As always, those facts will allow my readers to decide for themselves.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, I don't know that you sent your form in. What I can say is this: I did not receive your tax returns, and therefore I did not send a non disclosure agreement to Arc. Those are the facts. Now, before you make any claims about Arc backing out or running away "from his own challenge like a coward tucking his tail between his legs" be sure I have received your tax returns direct from the IRS. Until I do receive your tax forms from the IRS there is no challenge. And if you claim otherwise, I will do my best to set the record straight.

I have given you a fair chance, Rob, but I will not allow you to distort the truth.

[Rob.Singer]

Robs silence is deafening.

Follow the dotted line and pay attention. Or, you can go to the thread that has my recent $20k royal and other big winners posted, get an upset stomach over it, and join all the others who over the years, loathed me for publishing my even bigger winners week after week in Gaming Today, then found themselves chowing down the tums in order to sleep at night. ,

[Rob.Singer]

Rob, I don't know that you sent your form in. What I can say is this: I did not receive your tax returns, and therefore I did not send a non disclosure agreement to Arc. Those are the facts. Now, before you make any claims about Arc backing out or running away "from his own challenge like a coward tucking his tail between his legs" be sure I have received your tax returns direct from the IRS. Until I do receive your tax forms from the IRS there is no challenge. And if you claim otherwise, I will do my best to set the record straight.

I have given you a fair chance, Rob, but I will not allow you to distort the truth.

That's dumb Alan and it makes no sense. Show me where in arci's challenge he laid out a groundrule that stated I had to send my form in first, then he didn't have to send his in until AFTER you received my tax returns AND until after you & arci signed that silly NDA. Go ahead--show me. People will immediately see the truth, and you have zero to do with being able to erase the facts I write about in my article. You are, however, giving me a few more ideas on what to add the more you try to twist them here. So be careful. All you're doing is rewriting the challenge rules after the fact, and as usual, your grasp of reality isn't going to do you any favors.

The more nonsense you post about "the record according to Alan" the more the link will be worth to me.

[arcimede$]

That logic escapes me. I accepted it by sending in the form with the fee and gave Alan's address as the 3rd party. I then told arci to stop stalling and get it done too, and I clearly stated he had 2 weeks to do so or I would take action. And while he was obviously sweating up a storm during those 2 weeks of silence, I did what I said I would do. So since arci stalled and dithered, he submitted nothing. At the end of the day, talk indeed may be cheap, but silence & cowering has zero value.

While analyzing this is simple, I'll let the GT readers decide for themselves.

Unless IRS forms show up at Alan's you never sent them in. Of course, I already know you never sent them in but then I know you are a pathological liar. I'm still available to send my forms to Alan if he sends me an NDA. Nothing has changed. I have the form ready to go.

And, since you backed down on the 2008, 2009 forms we now know you lost those years. If you had won you would be happy to send in the forms. QED.

[arcimede$]

Let me say it as I see it:

1. You can't say Arc backed out because I never sent him the NDA which I think was a reasonable request on his part.
2. I find it curious that redietz has joined up with Rob to blast Bob Dancer but then we know that redietz wants to be known as a gaming guru and gaming consultant so I guess blasting the competition is the thing to do.
3. Rob, if you claim that Arc backed out you have really crossed the line. ONLY if I received your tax returns and Arc failed to send me his tax returns after I sent him the NDA could you claim that Arc backed out. Rob, do not make the mistake of saying Arc backed out. He did not.
4. And since when does Arc have to present his tax returns to prove that Rob Singer has won what he claims to have won?

Alan, maybe now you're starting to understand that Singer and the truth are rarely found together. This little exercise is a good one for getting to know the real Singer. He will lie about anything. As far as I know, if he sent in requesting those tax forms there is no way to cancel the request. So, if he was telling the truth you would eventually see them. You won't.

[slingshot]

Despite the outcome of this whole scenario, Alan's suggestion still stands. You can't prove the validity of the system. The only way to do that is for someone to play ONE of the strategies at 1200 credits-if the win goal isn't reached-and then say yea or nay that the system worked during one of the 3 sessions. And don't use the high denoms for an excuse-it can be 25-50cents-$1-$2 on artt, for example. I've heard all the excuses from all sides and yet not one of the con side of the argument has tried ANY of the strategies. Otherwise, continue seeing who can piss the farthest.

[Alan Mendelson]

slingshot, I am going to go even farther than what you said: I don't think anyone can prove that Rob's system works just like no one can prove than conventional strategy (what is taught by Dancer, Grochowski or a host of others) works.

Strategy and methodology is only a factor in whether or not you will have a winning hand or a winning session. it all comes down to the RNG and what it delivers. Playing video poker is not a test of the right draws to make. Video poker is a gamble -- every way you look at it. You hope that your holds and draws will turn out the way you want them to. But making the "correct hold" doesn't make you a winner, just as making holds Rob Singer's way won't make you a winner.

Personally I cannot consider a tax return as proof that anyone's strategy or method of play is superior. There are too many other factors that affect the bottom line in video poker and "luck" is the number one factor -- not the strategy followed, not the use of win and loss goals, not the prayers recited when dealt four to the royal, etc.

And because tax returns don't prove anything, I think looking at tax returns has no purpose at all. Rather, I would like to know the reasoning behind different strategies.

In fairness to Rob, I think his reasoning is pretty good for certain "special plays." I also think his reasoning is valid for win and loss limits and goals. Now, I am also going to say that the conventional strategy is also valid and in fact Rob follows conventional strategy most of the time.

So when you step back what the heck is all of this arguing all about? Nonsense is what it's all about.

[quahaug]

This has nothing to do with Arci, Rob. I'm asking you for one sch.c as a professional gambler, nothing more, nothing less. Put up or shut up.

[slingshot]

slingshot, I am going to go even farther than what you said: I don't think anyone can prove that Rob's system works just like no one can prove than conventional strategy (what is taught by Dancer, Grochowski or a host of others) works.

Strategy and methodology is only a factor in whether or not you will have a winning hand or a winning session. it all comes down to the RNG and what it delivers. Playing video poker is not a test of the right draws to make. Video poker is a gamble -- every way you look at it. You hope that your holds and draws will turn out the way you want them to. But making the "correct hold" doesn't make you a winner, just as making holds Rob Singer's way won't make you a winner.

Personally I cannot consider a tax return as proof that anyone's strategy or method of play is superior. There are too many other factors that affect the bottom line in video poker and "luck" is the number one factor -- not the strategy followed, not the use of win and loss goals, not the prayers recited when dealt four to the royal, etc.

And because tax returns don't prove anything, I think looking at tax returns has no purpose at all. Rather, I would like to know the reasoning behind different strategies.

In fairness to Rob, I think his reasoning is pretty good for certain "special plays." I also think his reasoning is valid for win and loss limits and goals. Now, I am also going to say that the conventional strategy is also valid and in fact Rob follows conventional strategy most of the time.

So when you step back what the heck is all of this arguing all about? Nonsense is what it's all about.

I felt that way when the last Royal was hit. I woulda been outta there way before then. But then again, he DID play the 1200 credits fully. I would have just played the 400 credits on 3 different machines. I played yesterday on 12 different machines with only 1 quad on bp. Everyone was really griping and a few left, one guy threw his card in the waste basket. This is called random?

[Rob.Singer]

This has nothing to do with Arci, Rob. I'm asking you for one sch.c as a professional gambler, nothing more, nothing less. Put up or shut up.

Proves nothing. Alan's already said it: returns mean nothing coming from anyone directly.

[Rob.Singer]

Unless IRS forms show up at Alan's you never sent them in. Of course, I already know you never sent them in but then I know you are a pathological liar. I'm still available to send my forms to Alan if he sends me an NDA. Nothing has changed. I have the form ready to go.

And, since you backed down on the 2008, 2009 forms we now know you lost those years. If you had won you would be happy to send in the forms. QED.

Keep sweating arci Those who read this thread after they read my article will decide what makes sense. Of course, they can also do what I did and actually READ the form, and they'd easily see where you can only request 7 years the first time. That spells bad news for you needing '08 & '09 after already seeing I requested the max. But keep digging your own hole my friend. I'm sure you'll need one around there sooner or later anyway And just in case Alan keeps having this strange sympathy for you and your self-created pitiful situation, I've already copied this entire thread and put it into linkable blog form. Nothing beats my megaphone! You may even need a vp.com meet & greet among you and the hacks over there in order to help you figure a way out of the corner you've painted yourself into by running away from this one.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, why don't you explain, as I asked, where in the world you came up with the story about arci not sending in his request form until AFTER you received my returns? And if you go back and read your own forum, you'd see that arci proposed we BOTH do this, not just me.

Where do you come up with these things? Good thing I'll be "setting the record straight" in my article.

[Rob.Singer]

Despite the outcome of this whole scenario, Alan's suggestion still stands. You can't prove the validity of the system. The only way to do that is for someone to play ONE of the strategies at 1200 credits-if the win goal isn't reached-and then say yea or nay that the system worked during one of the 3 sessions. And don't use the high denoms for an excuse-it can be 25-50cents-$1-$2 on artt, for example. I've heard all the excuses from all sides and yet not one of the con side of the argument has tried ANY of the strategies. Otherwise, continue seeing who can piss the farthest.

Sling, you've seen the enormous jealousy here in the other jackpot thread over how much I win by playing not all that much once a month. How do you think these people would react to being there for the actual winning? The geniuses on WoV couldn't stomach it, arci never wanted to have to live with the memory, and no one else would. All they'd say is "it's easy to win a lot of small winners, but that one big loss will wipe it all out and more"--of course, completely ignoring the many big winners that happen. That's one of the reasons why GT loved my column. The owner required I play a session in front of him and I did, hitting a dollar royal very quickly into the session. He was a rich man and congratulated me. These people wouldn't.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, you have what I'm going to write about and how, it's all right here for everyone to confirm when they want the proof, the best part is the readers will all be able to watch arci lie and squirm his way thru his own proposal, and now they'll even be able to watch you come up with several head-scratching, after-the-fact challenge parameters that make no sense at all, which is why you have no way to answer the questions.

It's all been said. Arci cooked his own goose when he did nothing but point fingers after the 2 weeks were up. And if you worked for me after making up that stupid story about my returns must be in your hands before arci needs to send in HIS form....I'd walk you out with everybody watching.

The readers will decide. Yes they will. And I'm not you or your mercy-mission arci. I'm wasting entirely too much time here, trying to get thru your density. I've got articles to write, places to go, and family is coming to town. So here's a hint: sit back, relax, and wait for your visitors to spike, which will mean one or both articles ran. It'll be a while, and I won't be back until after that time IF there's any questions. In the meantime, please welcome arci to continue trying to make himself feel better about a proven liar being a weasel by backing out of his own challenge. You just can't make these things up!

[Vegas_lover]

So in other words, to round this one up. Rob's articles are going to be about patting himself on the back some more and blasting the people he has a beef with. Cops at the scene of an accident describe Rob's upcoming articles best: "move along people, there's nothing to see here". As I said earlier in this thread, no reason for me to read them. Not interested because of the content.

My guess is the main reason publishers still give Rob a platform is because they know people like to look at a train wreck. Sad but true. People read his stuff and wonder if this man could really be such a self absorbed ................(insert whatever you like on the dotted lines). He surely is the man everybody loves to hate. Even though Rob thinks that it has everything to do with his amazing vp results, I have a different opinion.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, why don't you explain, as I asked, where in the world you came up with the story about arci not sending in his request form until AFTER you received my returns? And if you go back and read your own forum, you'd see that arci proposed we BOTH do this, not just me.

Where do you come up with these things? Good thing I'll be "setting the record straight" in my article.

Rob, I don't recall the order of who said what, and frankly it doesn't matter. If you want to prove your wins you should send your tax returns to an independent third party to have them verified. I don't think Arc's claims about winning are an issue here. Frankly, if he shows a profit playing 25-cent to $1 machines I wouldn't care. And, frankly, I don't care if you have big profits averaging a hundred thou a year. And the reason I feel this way is that I believe people can and do win playing video poker. If I didn't play craps, I'd be showing a profit from my video poker as well over multiple years because I've hit big royals and when I had my long royal flush drought I had an abnormally high number of straight flushes and quad aces.

So again, the "money argument" doesn't impress me.

But for the record, Arc asked that I sign a non disclosure agreement before he asked the IRS to send to me his tax returns. And it was my decision, and my decision alone, not to send to Arc the NDA until I received your tax returns. I did this because I honestly didnt want your tax returns Rob and I thought if I could talk you out of this chest-thumping exercise I would save Arc the time, trouble and expense of sending me his tax returns for his turn at chest-thumping.

So if you want to say that I derailed the challenge then please go ahead and say it. I can take it. I think the challenge is meaningless to begin with, as I said earlier.

[quahaug]

Does Rob really think we care about this Arci crap? I thought this had to do with fileing as a pro gambler and not owing taxes even with a winning year, which has nothing to do with proving anything or showing up anybody. I gave Rob the benefit of the doubt for a long time but no more. He's proven beyond a shadow(man) of a doubt that when it comes to video poker, He's full of s#&t.

[Alan Mendelson]

Does Rob really think we care about this Arci crap? I thought this had to do with fileing as a pro gambler and not owing taxes even with a winning year, which has nothing to do with proving anything or showing up anybody.

Yes, this is what's most interesting to me. But again, it's not what shows on the tax returns. Anybody can put anything on a tax return. What would be of interest is some documentation from the IRS that the unusual deductions held up to the IRS scrutiny and he could in fact deduct such things as groceries for a business meal deduction. We don't need his tax returns for that -- we need an opinion from the IRS.