Page 186 of 501 FirstFirst ... 86136176182183184185186187188189190196236286 ... LastLast
Results 3,701 to 3,720 of 10016

Thread: The WoV Thread

  1. #3701
    Hey Mission,

    Could you read my last post over there under the sports betting thread? I don't know if reading comprehension has taken a dip or people just can't handle that they may be wrong or what. I thought I was perfectly clear that I was not defending the original poster, but was pointing out why telling him to post plays is absurd. Evidently, nobody understands what the hell I just said. Wouldn't be the first time, but I reread my post and I seemed to have said what I wanted to say. What is it that is confusing?

    If you get a few minutes in the next couple days, take a peek. Most of the posters over there seem almost completely oblivious when it comes to sports betting. But they also don't seem to know they're oblivious.

  2. #3702
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I don't know if reading comprehension has taken a dip or people just can't handle that they may be wrong or what.
    The answer is "what".

    Nobody understands Martian, try making sense in English once in awhile...you fucking ditz.

  3. #3703
    Mission,
    I don’t know any of the people personally on any site I ever visited. I just find all this bullshit about gambling interesting and a fun way to kill some retired time being a losing gambler 90% of the time I enjoyed casinos.

    I know you find the DarkOz play outstanding, but from my point of view and opinion it’s pathetic. Read one of my posts above explaining why.

    I’m not interested in you personally at all. You seem to pop up a lot while I scroll around causing me to read what you write and have an opinion.

    I also find the WOV site to be full of bullshit artists who never prove a single fucking thing, but talk a lot of bullshit. Not much different from here but at least here you’re allowed to get your point across without getting banned in the middle of it.

    The people that control that site like you, BBB, Shank, Once Dear, all talk like you’re all some type of mini-me Nostradamus. As soon as someone points something out or challenges anyone of your pet AP’s the site gets rid of them quickly. It’s obvious this is all being done to maintain the false narrative of beating casinos that Shank needs to convince people of. Not sure what his marketing deal is or selling contract was, but it’s obvious he needs to convince people too willingly piss there money away to foreign countries with the false pretense and hope of winning regularly.

    Anyone who joins that site and claims to be a money-making AP gets the red-carpet treatment yet, not one of them have to prove a fucking thing. Name me one member there that challenges AP claims, and I don’t mean bullshit everyone knows not to be true system claims. Didn’t all of you wrap your loving arms around Wizard of Nothing? Shit you even dealt with him personally. How you people control the gambling discussions was no different than how BBB controlled the political threads. Biased for personal gain.

    Just the fact you’re impressed with these plays and type of life says something also. It appears all of you are looking and waiting for the fast buck that still obviously hasn’t come.

    Read Monets posts above if you want some real truth.
    Last edited by blackhole; 01-18-2020 at 07:53 PM.

  4. #3704
    Blackhole is the worst. His whole existence on these forums seems to be insulting anyone who is an AP in nature.

    There are so many inconsistencies and such nonsense in what Blackhole posts. I could sit here and list A,b,c, and d on why he's not worth reading. He called me a liar and it clearly doesn't matter. I've said very little about myself. He told me I'd go broke, when I'm not even a pro-gambler anymore. I can still play cards at a very high level though. I had empirical observation on my recent results. Even if I lost my ass in BJ, I can go grind it back out playing poker not to mention other income sources. On top of that, I live a very meager existence and my costs are very minimal. Any anon person can think I'm a liar or whatever, I don't are. The truth is probably far more interesting, but i have little interest in revealing who I am to people I don't know or trust.

    One thing is clear, there is a whole group of weirdos that have something to prove personally against everyone on here who understands math. Coach Belly is another one of these types. One can respond to their nonsense, but lowering yourself to their level is not a winning play. lol.

    Blackhole obviously cares considerably about what others think. Back to back postings over and over trying to prove something about some group of people who have little in common outside of using the same internet forum..
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  5. #3705
    Coach,

    I’m not confused or in denial as to your meaning, I was just being a smart ass in a polite way. No, I have not recently been evaluated for autism.

    Redietz,

    Sure thing, I’ll take a look at it as soon as I’m on the computer, on my phone atm.

    Blackhole,

    Nothing wrong with finding it interesting. People finding gambling interesting certainly benefits me, considering I write about gambling-related things.

    Darkoz play takes a small number and turns it into a much larger number. By any metric, the RoI on that one is, in fact, outstanding. If you think it’s a, “Pathetic,” way to make money, you’re certainly entitled to think that way.

    I don’t know what unprovable, “Bullshit,” you’re accusing people of talking. The APs on that board don’t really seem to talk shop too much at all, for the most part. As you see, many of them declared that they were leaving when serious shop started getting talked.

    I’ll tell you this: if the goal is to convince people they can beat casinos, we’re not doing a particularly good job. It seems to me that every game Wizard analyzes, the result is a house edge working against the player. We mathematically disprove betting systems. If the goal was to pimp the online casinos and get people gambling, I’d say, “Hey, here’s x casino with y bonus offer on craps for new players, you should sign up and try your system there!”

    Anyway, I’ll appraise an online casino promotion mathematically if someone asks, and I’ll also analyze the terms & conditions. If it sucks or is expected to lose, then I’ll say that. If it’s mathematically expected to win, then I’ll say that. It’s going in an article, though, no way am I going to take the time to fully analyze a promotion and not get paid for it.

    Last article of the series should come out today or tomorrow. It’ll basically serve as response to the remainder of your post.

  6. #3706
    I read Monet’s quoted posts on the previous page and have no major objections to what he’s trying to convey. I have a few minor objections on specific points, but lack the inclination to debate them. I guess I’ll just give a short list of caveats:

    1. I don’t know what anyone is supposed to be trying to, “Project.” I can’t expect that anyone has read every article of mine, or would even be inclined to, but some aspects of AP truly suck. One example is sitting on a must-hit machine for 20 hours, totally sucked. Nothing high-flying or glamorous about puffing up half a pack of smokes and drinking shitty coffee at three in the morning to not fall asleep at the damn thing. Nothing high-flying or glamorous sitting at a video poker machine for hours on end to pump coin-in, either. Some people probably enjoy that more than I do, though. I think I can actually ENJOY playing video poker for maybe an hour a week.

    2. As far as Monet’s plays, some plays have a higher percentage return than others. There are markets where nobody is only playing a 1% edge, but there can be other pitfalls, such as some of the ones he mentioned.

    3. I wrote an article about the struggle to quit drinking several months back. I haven’t drank since March of last year. The only support I, “Needed,” was that of a few people close to me, which I got.

    Aside from that, I don’t know anything of Axelwolf’s business. He’s asked me about some math-related stuff here and there, but I haven’t worked on any plays with him since 2015, so I really can’t speak to anything specifically.

    Anyway, in my observation, most AP is grinding type stuff like Monet speaks to and the sole purpose of it is to make money. I don’t see where anyone has really challenged that notion.

  7. #3707
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    I read Monet’s quoted posts on the previous page and have no major objections to what he’s trying to convey. I have a few minor objections on specific points, but lack the inclination to debate them. I guess I’ll just give a short list of caveats:

    1. I don’t know what anyone is supposed to be trying to, “Project.” I can’t expect that anyone has read every article of mine, or would even be inclined to, but some aspects of AP truly suck. One example is sitting on a must-hit machine for 20 hours, totally sucked. Nothing high-flying or glamorous about puffing up half a pack of smokes and drinking shitty coffee at three in the morning to not fall asleep at the damn thing. Nothing high-flying or glamorous sitting at a video poker machine for hours on end to pump coin-in, either. Some people probably enjoy that more than I do, though. I think I can actually ENJOY playing video poker for maybe an hour a week.

    2. As far as Monet’s plays, some plays have a higher percentage return than others. There are markets where nobody is only playing a 1% edge, but there can be other pitfalls, such as some of the ones he mentioned.

    3. I wrote an article about the struggle to quit drinking several months back. I haven’t drank since March of last year. The only support I, “Needed,” was that of a few people close to me, which I got.

    Aside from that, I don’t know anything of Axelwolf’s business. He’s asked me about some math-related stuff here and there, but I haven’t worked on any plays with him since 2015, so I really can’t speak to anything specifically.

    Anyway, in my observation, most AP is grinding type stuff like Monet speaks to and the sole purpose of it is to make money. I don’t see where anyone has really challenged that notion.
    Grinding out AP is pretty boring stuff so it's funny to me that you have guys like BH with the "you can't tell me you make money at it you fucking anonymous loser lying assholes." That's hilarious shit.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  8. #3708
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    I read Monet’s quoted posts on the previous page and have no major objections to what he’s trying to convey. I have a few minor objections on specific points, but lack the inclination to debate them. I guess I’ll just give a short list of caveats:

    1. I don’t know what anyone is supposed to be trying to, “Project.” I can’t expect that anyone has read every article of mine, or would even be inclined to, but some aspects of AP truly suck. One example is sitting on a must-hit machine for 20 hours, totally sucked. Nothing high-flying or glamorous about puffing up half a pack of smokes and drinking shitty coffee at three in the morning to not fall asleep at the damn thing. Nothing high-flying or glamorous sitting at a video poker machine for hours on end to pump coin-in, either. Some people probably enjoy that more than I do, though. I think I can actually ENJOY playing video poker for maybe an hour a week.

    2. As far as Monet’s plays, some plays have a higher percentage return than others. There are markets where nobody is only playing a 1% edge, but there can be other pitfalls, such as some of the ones he mentioned.

    3. I wrote an article about the struggle to quit drinking several months back. I haven’t drank since March of last year. The only support I, “Needed,” was that of a few people close to me, which I got.

    Aside from that, I don’t know anything of Axelwolf’s business. He’s asked me about some math-related stuff here and there, but I haven’t worked on any plays with him since 2015, so I really can’t speak to anything specifically.

    Anyway, in my observation, most AP is grinding type stuff like Monet speaks to and the sole purpose of it is to make money. I don’t see where anyone has really challenged that notion.

    The way you and mickey stopped drinking is not unusual, Mission. If you look up some of the meta-analyses in the sociology and psych literature from the 80's and 90's, it turned out that 12-step programs and other formal programs were surprisingly no more effective than people deciding on their own with family and friend support to stop. The stopping rate for both formal and informal was not high, but the 12-step and rehab advocates of course don't mention that their way is no more effective than the personal way. I don't remember the exact stopping percentages back then, but I think it was in the 25% ballpark. I could be off on that.

  9. #3709
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Coach,

    I’m not confused or in denial as to your meaning, I was just being a smart ass in a polite way. No, I have not recently been evaluated for autism.

    Redietz,

    Sure thing, I’ll take a look at it as soon as I’m on the computer, on my phone atm.

    Blackhole,

    Nothing wrong with finding it interesting. People finding gambling interesting certainly benefits me, considering I write about gambling-related things.

    Darkoz play takes a small number and turns it into a much larger number. By any metric, the RoI on that one is, in fact, outstanding. If you think it’s a, “Pathetic,” way to make money, you’re certainly entitled to think that way.

    I don’t know what unprovable, “Bullshit,” you’re accusing people of talking. The APs on that board don’t really seem to talk shop too much at all, for the most part. As you see, many of them declared that they were leaving when serious shop started getting talked.

    I’ll tell you this: if the goal is to convince people they can beat casinos, we’re not doing a particularly good job. It seems to me that every game Wizard analyzes, the result is a house edge working against the player. We mathematically disprove betting systems. If the goal was to pimp the online casinos and get people gambling, I’d say, “Hey, here’s x casino with y bonus offer on craps for new players, you should sign up and try your system there!”

    Anyway, I’ll appraise an online casino promotion mathematically if someone asks, and I’ll also analyze the terms & conditions. If it sucks or is expected to lose, then I’ll say that. If it’s mathematically expected to win, then I’ll say that. It’s going in an article, though, no way am I going to take the time to fully analyze a promotion and not get paid for it.

    Last article of the series should come out today or tomorrow. It’ll basically serve as response to the remainder of your post.

    You would have been a good technical writer, Mission. You are patient and precise. The military could certainly use you.

    I was curious...it's considered allowable to edit interviews and streamline them. You don't even have to ask interviewee permission unless the person being interviewed demands a look at the edited version. Now you did do some editing, although you formally listed the types and locations in the interview of the editing. So do you always do that? Or did you feel this particular interview you wanted to dot the i's and be completely verbatim? I guess what I'm asking is if that's a personal rule you follow or do you streamline other interviews when the subject or interviewee allows?

  10. #3710
    Mickey,

    He can believe whatever he wishes to believe. I'll offer some observations, but I'm not going to set about proving his assertions wrong unless someone is paying me to do so. It seems like he is willing to acknowledge the viability of some things, but I haven't read all of his posts, so I could be wrong.

    Redietz,

    Good timing! I responded in that thread over there.

    For me, what worked was mainly just reducing drinking down to a series of physical actions that I have a choice to either commit or not to commit. I've had people ask, "How can I stop drinking?" My answer is pretty simple: You don't take a drink of something that has alcohol in it. I might be a weird guy, but it's as simple as that for me. It doesn't mean that I never want a drink, as I often do, I just choose not to drink at those times.

  11. #3711
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Coach,

    I’m not confused or in denial as to your meaning, I was just being a smart ass in a polite way. No, I have not recently been evaluated for autism.

    Redietz,

    Sure thing, I’ll take a look at it as soon as I’m on the computer, on my phone atm.

    Blackhole,

    Nothing wrong with finding it interesting. People finding gambling interesting certainly benefits me, considering I write about gambling-related things.

    Darkoz play takes a small number and turns it into a much larger number. By any metric, the RoI on that one is, in fact, outstanding. If you think it’s a, “Pathetic,” way to make money, you’re certainly entitled to think that way.

    I don’t know what unprovable, “Bullshit,” you’re accusing people of talking. The APs on that board don’t really seem to talk shop too much at all, for the most part. As you see, many of them declared that they were leaving when serious shop started getting talked.

    I’ll tell you this: if the goal is to convince people they can beat casinos, we’re not doing a particularly good job. It seems to me that every game Wizard analyzes, the result is a house edge working against the player. We mathematically disprove betting systems. If the goal was to pimp the online casinos and get people gambling, I’d say, “Hey, here’s x casino with y bonus offer on craps for new players, you should sign up and try your system there!”

    Anyway, I’ll appraise an online casino promotion mathematically if someone asks, and I’ll also analyze the terms & conditions. If it sucks or is expected to lose, then I’ll say that. If it’s mathematically expected to win, then I’ll say that. It’s going in an article, though, no way am I going to take the time to fully analyze a promotion and not get paid for it.

    Last article of the series should come out today or tomorrow. It’ll basically serve as response to the remainder of your post.

    You would have been a good technical writer, Mission. You are patient and precise. The military could certainly use you.

    I was curious...it's considered allowable to edit interviews and streamline them. You don't even have to ask interviewee permission unless the person being interviewed demands a look at the edited version. Now you did do some editing, although you formally listed the types and locations in the interview of the editing. So do you always do that? Or did you feel this particular interview you wanted to dot the i's and be completely verbatim? I guess what I'm asking is if that's a personal rule you follow or do you streamline other interviews when the subject or interviewee allows?
    I appreciate the compliment, Redietz! Different strokes for different folks, of course. Some people would frame it as, "TL;DR," or, "Long-winded, verbose, sophistic and repetitive," and it would all be the same thing. It just depends on what a person likes to read, or in some cases, IF a person actually likes to read. I'm the type that, if I click on a headline and expect to find a detailed article and it turns out to be a podcast/video, I'm disappointed. That doesn't mean I don't like those things, but I prefer reading. I think reading comprehensive analyses are good ways to think about things, I listen to podcasts/videos when I don't feel like thinking, just feel like being told stuff.

    ON INTERVIEWS:

    I feel like I can answer your question completely with a short list:

    1.) I ALWAYS offer anyone I am interviewing the opportunity to completely delete anything in the interview that they do not wish to have appear.

    2.) I also offer anyone I interview the opportunity to make minor corrections (provided they tell me what they are) if they decide that a particular sentence did not come off in the way they intended it.

    3.) I NEVER allow an interview to be published unless the interview subject has either:

    A. Read it already.

    OR:

    B. Declined to read it ahead of time.

    4.) I do edit interviews and the person being interviewed sees the version of first edit, which is everything that will even possibly make it into the interview. Anything that has been completely removed in the first edit will not make it into the interview. In fact, I always delete my recordings after the first edit is completed. I don't want anyone to feel blindsided by something that makes it to print.

    5.) I streamline some interviews, but some I don't. I honestly felt that Darkoz and I had a back-and-forth (not as obvious in the second half due to redactions) that would have made really good radio. I liked it so much that I decided to retain the more conversational sounding aspect of it. Most interviews that I would do would be more question-answer with the questions being streamlined. I wanted this one to flow naturally, see where it went, so I didn't even make a list of questions to ask...I usually would.

  12. #3712
    Wow. I did not realize that you went in without a question list. That probably contributed to the naturalness of the interview. That's really something.

    LOL. I don't think I have ever done that...I'd be scared to death I'd hit numerous blank patches.

    You're right. It read like a radio program.

    My old mentor-type guy, Robert Gannon, used to always check back with his interviewees also. He did mostly science writing, and there was always the chance he completely bungled or misinterpreted something. There were times he took basically a six-week crash course in a subject, and after the piece was done, one of the interviewees would explain that he got some element or description ass-backwards.

  13. #3713
    Thanks Redietz! Since it was largely a biographical interview, it seemed like a fun thing to try. After that, you see what people have to say about doing it that way and then maybe conduct fewer or more interviews that way.

    I'll tell you one thing I hate, though. I hate it when a headline is framed as, "An interview with xxx," and then it is 90% backstory in the writer's words and maybe two-three question-answers with the interview subject. If the writer just wants to have the vast majority of the thing be his perspective, then why do the interview in the first place? There is sometimes a link that says, "Click for full interview," if I see no such link, I don't even read the thing at all.

    No blank patches. I naturally had a number of fallback questions in my head to stimulate the conversation. I don't think I asked any of them, or if I did, only because they naturally occurred.

  14. #3714
    There could be something to coach's autism inquiry. Generally, when a self-professed writer continuously overwrites (ie., putting up long diatribes to combat uncertainty of purpose, while never really feeling he said what he initially wanted to say) then there is definitely an underlying problem.

    Then again, the WoV forum's self-confidence destroying overall atmosphere guided by the struggling collection of underachieving moderators who have been molded into shape by the owning foreigners, could well define the site's bizzare approach and therefore, effect, to feeling good about oneself's abilities.

  15. #3715
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    There could be something to coach's autism inquiry. Generally, when a self-professed writer continuously overwrites (ie., putting up long diatribes to combat uncertainty of purpose, while never really feeling he said what he initially wanted to say) then there is definitely an underlying problem.

    Then again, the WoV forum's self-confidence destroying overall atmosphere guided by the struggling collection of underachieving moderators who have been molded into shape by the owning foreigners, could well define the site's bizzare approach and therefore, effect, to feeling good about oneself's abilities.
    Ha! Didn't know you had this verbiage in you!

  16. #3716
    Just had an interesting exchange at WoV with someone named TDTony. He impugned my veracity. I offered to lay 5K against his 50 bucks and an apology. He backed down.

    I tried to remember mickey's hummingbird mouth or ass quote, but couldn't come up with it.

    I get the feeling most of the WoV membership thinks fifty bucks is betting real money. Cheap motherfuckers over there.

    Note: Just saw "Dolemite is My Name." Need to start using mf word more.

  17. #3717
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Just had an interesting exchange at WoV with someone named TDTony. He impugned my veracity. I offered to lay 5K against his 50 bucks and an apology. He backed down.
    I'll put the 50 bucks up for TD.

    All I require is that you get him to meet up with me & you in person to settle the bet to his satisfaction.

    I will pay you the cash if the bet is lost, I'll even spring for the coffee and danish, but any apologies are on him.

    If you want to scam me by working together, or putting a name tag on an impostor or whatever, then go for it.

    I'll be in LV for a week surrounding Easter and then Memorial Day.

    Set it up...keep me posted, and I'll see you there.

  18. #3718
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Just had an interesting exchange at WoV with someone named TDTony. He impugned my veracity. I offered to lay 5K against his 50 bucks and an apology. He backed down.
    I'll put the 50 bucks up for TD.

    All I require is that you get him to meet up with me & you in person to settle the bet to his satisfaction.

    I will pay you the cash if the bet is lost, I'll even spring for the coffee and danish, but any apologies are on him.

    If you want to scam me by working together, or putting a name tag on an impostor or whatever, then go for it.

    I'll be in LV for a week surrounding Easter and then Memorial Day.

    Set it up...keep me posted, and I'll see you there.

    You can contact TD yourself. I'm 50/50 to be going next week. Why would I time a trip for somebody else's schedule to make $50? If I wind up cashing the ticket sooner and a photocopy doesn't work for you, then contact Shackleford or Todd/Dan and I'll meet them for the ticket cashing. The offshore is the 40-1.

    I don't know who TDTony is, but if he didn't feel like risking $50 for 5K, that's indicative of a pretty weak argument. Or a really broke dude.

    The only name tag I'll be ordering is "White Dolemite." That has a ring to it....motherfucker.

  19. #3719
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Just had an interesting exchange at WoV with someone named TDTony. He impugned my veracity. I offered to lay 5K against his 50 bucks and an apology. He backed down.

    I tried to remember mickey's hummingbird mouth or ass quote, but couldn't come up with it.

    I get the feeling most of the WoV membership thinks fifty bucks is betting real money. Cheap motherfuckers over there.

    Note: Just saw "Dolemite is My Name." Need to start using mf word more.
    alligator mouth/hummingbird ass
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  20. #3720
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    I read Monet’s quoted posts on the previous page and have no major objections to what he’s trying to convey. I have a few minor objections on specific points, but lack the inclination to debate them. I guess I’ll just give a short list of caveats:

    1. I don’t know what anyone is supposed to be trying to, “Project.” I can’t expect that anyone has read every article of mine, or would even be inclined to, but some aspects of AP truly suck. One example is sitting on a must-hit machine for 20 hours, totally sucked. Nothing high-flying or glamorous about puffing up half a pack of smokes and drinking shitty coffee at three in the morning to not fall asleep at the damn thing. Nothing high-flying or glamorous sitting at a video poker machine for hours on end to pump coin-in, either. Some people probably enjoy that more than I do, though. I think I can actually ENJOY playing video poker for maybe an hour a week.

    2. As far as Monet’s plays, some plays have a higher percentage return than others. There are markets where nobody is only playing a 1% edge, but there can be other pitfalls, such as some of the ones he mentioned.

    3. I wrote an article about the struggle to quit drinking several months back. I haven’t drank since March of last year. The only support I, “Needed,” was that of a few people close to me, which I got.

    Aside from that, I don’t know anything of Axelwolf’s business. He’s asked me about some math-related stuff here and there, but I haven’t worked on any plays with him since 2015, so I really can’t speak to anything specifically.

    Anyway, in my observation, most AP is grinding type stuff like Monet speaks to and the sole purpose of it is to make money. I don’t see where anyone has really challenged that notion.

    The way you and mickey stopped drinking is not unusual, Mission. If you look up some of the meta-analyses in the sociology and psych literature from the 80's and 90's, it turned out that 12-step programs and other formal programs were surprisingly no more effective than people deciding on their own with family and friend support to stop. The stopping rate for both formal and informal was not high, but the 12-step and rehab advocates of course don't mention that their way is no more effective than the personal way. I don't remember the exact stopping percentages back then, but I think it was in the 25% ballpark. I could be off on that.
    The rehab advocates call Mission and I "dry drunks" because we haven't been formally rehabbed. I don't have anything against AA. It's probably a good way to make new friends. But I dont' need someone to tell me what I already know. And that is, IF YOU DON'T DRINK YOU WON'T GET DRUNK. I learned that saying from the Chaplain of Bourbon Street decades ago. It's pretty simple really.

    Nothing against the alcohol rehabilitation industry but I think they push the rehab thing to keep their industry going strong.

    I'm in my 35th month without a drink.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 52 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 52 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Genealogy Thread
    By mickeycrimm in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 06:29 AM
  2. Closed Thread
    By coach belly in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 08:29 PM
  3. Sportsbetting ONLY thread
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Sports & Sportsbetting
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-05-2016, 04:48 PM
  4. A thread for losses.
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-26-2014, 02:01 AM
  5. The Kicker Thread
    By Rob.Singer in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 01-12-2014, 02:24 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •