The WoV Thread

[Keystone]

kj didnt leave and Alan didnt leave because he was a bullshitter...he left because he has thin skin and he is weak.

How do you know? Have you ever met or spoken with him? Maybe he doesn’t care what his on-line persona is or simply tired of talking to strangers all day long..or maybe he left along with the many others because...well you’re a smart boy, you can figure it out

[LarryS]

ok i will rephrase regarding alan

his online "persona" has thin skin, and his online "persona is weak.

it would be rare that a person would be thin skinned online, and weak online and be a pillar of strength in real life. But I give you that. In real life he could be a real tiger.

[MisterV]

In all fairness to alan, he wound up enduring a pile of shit that would have taxed the powers of Hercules.

Not that he didn't deserve it, but I cannot fault him for packing up his tent and moving off.

Only a true masochist would have stuck around.

[LarryS]

there is nothing that an anonymous person can say on these anonymous boards that should be able to vex someone. For all I know MrV is an inmate in an insane asylum that was released under Regan, and for all you know I can be serving time at Rahway prison. Now if someone you respect and has credentials undresses you in public..that is something different.

Bur "Mr V was mean to me" is juvenile and weak. Mr V could be homeless and posting out of a library. He has zero cred....just as I as well.

If you claim to see a ten billion to 1 event occur, and you claim you had many chances to financially take advantage of it but refused....a sane person would see where the doubt comes from. He however never acknowledge that it was unbelievable behavior not to bet on this unbelievable event. He simple stated as fact that he doesnt bet on the horn. He never even claimed that he kicked himself for not placing a small bet. Then he is incredulous when people question the bizarre behavior coupled with the billions to one event.

But he was questioned by anonymous people with no credentials. We all might as well have been a clan of child molesting heroin addicts to him.

Running away from anonymous people who probably have their own imperfections is weak. Very weak.

If being questioned , mocked, disbelieved, laughed at, by anonymous people on a message board ,makes you ill at ease enough to make you run away....then you never belonged on message boards to begin with.

Heck on GF I had someone daily mocking me, disbelieving me, laughing at me, multiple times a day. Way less reserved and with more venom than anything here directed at ALAN. And I managed to deal with it. I could deal with it by ignoring him or go head to head.....and I did both....and I didnt need a psychiatrist in the end. Real life goes on. In the context of real life this board or any board is not worth gaining angst from. Its a diversion and even with the people who bash you...fun can be had.

So I stand by my characterization of his actions.....very weak.
He ran from wov as well and that board is overly moderated and he still got upset.

[The Boz]

Liberal politicians NEED a permanent underclass, one with a victims mentality....even better.

Some, but not all liberals may harbor that belief.

Seems to me that the difference between liberals and conservatives is compassion and empathy toward others vs. concern primarily for oneself.

For example, you're driving down the road and see that a car ran off the road into a tree, and a person is standing in the roadway trying to flag you down as you approach.

A liberal wonders "How can I help?"whereas a conservative wonders "Is this guy gonna try to rob me?"

BS, I see it as both would see if the person is ok. Most people on both sides have common decency. But the liberal would then advise the person that they are a victim and show them the ways they were victimized by the other driver, the car manufacturer, the road crew who paved it and the gas station who last sold them fuel. The conservative would ask if they had insurance and if they didn’t help how them the opportunities out there to rebound.

[MisterV]

LarryS., you point out that these are anonymous boards.

That is true, mostly.

Alan of course is the exception: nothing anonymous about him.

[LarryS]

again, when anonymous people give your the business, really so what. He is willingly known. He wants us to know who he is , or else he could have arranged a moniker.
Again I had someone callling me a liar daily on GF,...whether I was known or was anonymous it would effect me the same. The person calling the names did not impress me so I didnt generate angst over it.

So if I give him a hard time or you do, or someone else here or at wov.......we all carry no weight. Just as the moron at GF who hated jews . We only have ower over you if you give us that power. Otherwise we are just dogs howling at the moon. I carry no weight. I am an expert on my own opinion..thats all I claim. And Alan can tell me that my opinion is flawed or he can run away.

Alan needs to learn to laugh at himself. He needs to see how what he claims does have "fibbing" written all over it. And maybe the people he hangs with in real life pretend to believe him and shrug it off. Thats fine. But the message boards are a different animal.

KJ perpetrated a lie about his death, he came clean, and gave reasons for it, and he may even regret it, and I dont use that to question believably of current comments by him.
However Alan never came clean, he still holds to the tale, and for that its fair game to question authenticity of other things he says. And thats the position HE put himself in.
Yet its no reason to keep running away. Especially from anonymous people who have no credibility in gambling established. I know I DONT. Most people on this board have no credibility established.....totally anonymous with unproven backgrounds. Maybe KJ and Mickey have some cred ...but thats about it for me. I dont know about the credentials of others.

So who cares is a self proclaimed umproven lawyer,and a self proclaimed unproven pharmacist, and other self proclaimed folks give him a hard time. Whatever we say carries little weight. Its not like the great John Patrick criticized him. Just a bunch of nobodies. He didnt feel the sting of being criticized on this board by gambling scholars

[MisterV]

He left because he could mount no effective defense, and he knew it.

Alan very much wanted to be thought of in a positive light, and the "eighteen yo's in a row" saga caused that light to dim.

I suspect that his health problems may also be complicating things a bit, causing him to lose the desire to engage in a good fight.

Fact is, the "eighteen yo's" is only one of a variety of questionable things he's said over the years, and previously when challenged about his wild claims and beliefs he just charged forward like the Energizer bunny.

Looks like that ship has sailed.

[redietz]

again, when anonymous people give your the business, really so what. He is willingly known. He wants us to know who he is , or else he could have arranged a moniker.
Again I had someone callling me a liar daily on GF,...whether I was known or was anonymous it would effect me the same. The person calling the names did not impress me so I didnt generate angst over it.

So if I give him a hard time or you do, or someone else here or at wov.......we all carry no weight. Just as the moron at GF who hated jews . We only have ower over you if you give us that power. Otherwise we are just dogs howling at the moon. I carry no weight. I am an expert on my own opinion..thats all I claim. And Alan can tell me that my opinion is flawed or he can run away.

Alan needs to learn to laugh at himself. He needs to see how what he claims does have "fibbing" written all over it. And maybe the people he hangs with in real life pretend to believe him and shrug it off. Thats fine. But the message boards are a different animal.

KJ perpetrated a lie about his death, he came clean, and gave reasons for it, and he may even regret it, and I dont use that to question believably of current comments by him.
However Alan never came clean, he still holds to the tale, and for that its fair game to question authenticity of other things he says. And thats the position HE put himself in.
Yet its no reason to keep running away. Especially from anonymous people who have no credibility in gambling established. I know I DONT. Most people on this board have no credibility established.....totally anonymous with unproven backgrounds. Maybe KJ and Mickey have some cred ...but thats about it for me. I dont know about the credentials of others.

So who cares is a self proclaimed umproven lawyer,and a self proclaimed unproven pharmacist, and other self proclaimed folks give him a hard time. Whatever we say carries little weight. Its not like the great John Patrick criticized him. Just a bunch of nobodies. He didnt feel the sting of being criticized on this board by gambling scholars

A couple of notes on these comments.

My primary rationale for being on this forum was the Mendelson/Singer (Argentino) dynamic and how it resonated with all of the classic paranormal claimants attaching themselves to media people who didn't quite know enough (and preferred to not learn).

I have no real reason to post much any longer, as the forum is pretty much Wizard West (or something), and I never was a member, and had no interest in being a member, of the Wizard forums. I think I may have signed up once to read what Singer had posted under a pseudonym, but that was it, and I'm not sure of that.

I have just about zero interest in having "conversations" with anonymous taglines on some message board, which segues into I think that
LarryS misses the forest for the trees with his "why is Alan bothered by anonymous posters?" comments.

Alan wasn't anonymous. Singer wasn't anonymous. Dan wasn't anonymous. Those were the three dominant posters here -- all real people with real names (everybody knew/knows Dan and Rob's actual identities). I may have been fourth -- again, a real person with a real name. All real people -- taking real life ownership of what was being said and anecdotes and opinions. And what was said here very clearly following them into real life.

Unlike just about every other braindead, stupid blathering anonymity-fest forum, the people doing the most posting here, me included, were connected to the real world. So the forum is completely, utterly different when it transforms from one where the four people posting the most are not anonymous to one where basically everybody is anonymous. It's completely, utterly different. Whatever my differences with Mr. Mendelson, it makes perfect sense for him to step away.

Taking flak from anonymous posters is unbalanced warfare. It's a waste of time. As far as the 18 yo's goes, the most reasonable Ockham's explanation is that somehow rigged dice were inserted into the game, probably accidentally by the house. I don't see what the debate is about. Alan was so adamant about it, while I have a hard time with 18, maybe it was 11 or 12 or something outlandish. Or maybe the rigged dice were that good and it was 18. If it happened, then clearly there were rigged dice. No big mystery. Various houses have used rigged dice in the past. Rigged dice exist. They explain the event.

The forum has gone from one where the primary posting people were real and took ownership of what was said in the real world, and they could be found in the real world. Now it's not that. Perfectly reasonable for many of the previous posters to call it a day.

[LarryS]

Thats funny. Ha ha funny.
If a person with no credential, who could be sitting in the basement of hos moms gives alan a hard time....that would cause him angst?

A person with knowledge can run rings around a dope that just posts with no credentials....including me.

Look at the Patrick board. Its a ghost town becahsue he presides over a house of cards, and he deleted or banned people who questioned his methods. If he was competent and knowledgeable...he could undress the non believers with facts and figures. But h couldnt so instead of running away, he did the second best cowardly thing.....force the questioners to go away.

Alan is no different. Maybe there is an exotic explanation for 18 yos, but he never backed down from that nimber, And he never explained why he didnt bet even once...other than"i dont bet horn bets".

so he got heat for the 18 yo story and for the unhuman reaction of just standing by and observing at table populated by a handful of people

however like Patrick he takes the weakling way out.

knowledge wins out...and knowledgeable people wipe the floor with detractors because they know more and can make the less knowledgeable look foolish

[redietz]

Thats funny. Ha ha funny.
If a person with no credential, who could be sitting in the basement of hos moms gives alan a hard time....that would cause him angst?

A person with knowledge can run rings around a dope that just posts with no credentials....including me.

Look at the Patrick board. Its a ghost town becahsue he presides over a house of cards, and he deleted or banned people who questioned his methods. If he was competent and knowledgeable...he could undress the non believers with facts and figures. But h couldnt so instead of running away, he did the second best cowardly thing.....force the questioners to go away.

Alan is no different. Maybe there is an exotic explanation for 18 yos, but he never backed down from that nimber, And he never explained why he didnt bet even once...other than"i dont bet horn bets".

so he got heat for the 18 yo story and for the unhuman reaction of just standing by and observing at table populated by a handful of people

however like Patrick he takes the weakling way out.

knowledge wins out...and knowledgeable people and wipe the floor with detractors because they know more and can make the less knowledgeable look foolish

It's unbalanced warfare. Every interaction or debate or argument Alan has with you, or anybody anonymous, carries risk in reality on his end and not on yours or theirs. Same with me or Dan or Singer, for that matter. So why bother?

[LarryS]

Same for patrick.....he is the so called person with credentials. He opens up a site and wont have a free exchange of all ideas. Just his ideas. He is not capable of defending his claim that his new BS in BJ brings the house edge down to zero. I questioned that and my post was deleted. Because he was only equipped to make a declaration. and expected all to accept it as fact.
Now his board gets maybe at best one post a day outside of patrick.

So alan has and had a choice. He can use his name or he can use an anonymous moniker. He chose to go public. Whether it was initially ego, or felt his name had credentials tied to it...it was his choice. The upside of being known is that you can win an argument or enjoy a debate with info that others cannot dispute....like I think he has interviewed various people.And thats the plus side...you get personal credit for making a good point. But the other side is that you get personal discredit for making a ridiculous point. When you do what he does and uses his name...he takes the positive side of that but runs from the downside.Life doesnt work that way. We all take the good with the bad,

[redietz]

Same for patrick.....he is the so called person with credentials. He opens up a site and wont have a free exchange of all ideas. Just his ideas. He is not capable of defending his claim that his new BS in BJ brings the house edge down to zero. I questioned that and my post was deleted. Because he was only equipped to make a declaration. and expected all to accept it as fact.
Now his board gets maybe at best one post a day outside of patrick.

So alan has and had a choice. He can use his name or he can use an anonymous moniker. He chose to go public. Whether it was initially ego, or felt his name had credentials tied to it...it was his choice. The upside of being known is that you can win an argument or enjoy a debate with info that others cannot dispute....like I think he has interviewed various people.And thats the plus side...you get personal credit for making a good point. But the other side is that you get personal discredit for making a ridiculous point. When you do what he does and uses his name...he takes the positive side of that but runs from the downside.Life doesnt work that way. We all take the good with the bad,

I'll save mickeycrimm the trouble of pointing out that LarryS used a false equitable dichotomy argument here. It's not "the good with the bad" for many people regarding anonymity versus non-anonymity. That's nonsense.

For example, there is virtually zero upside in the real world to my non-anonymous participation here. Zero. There is nothing to be gained. I'm non-anonymous primarily because I think it's juvenile to be anonymous.

[LarryS]

the upside could be ego. Getting accolades as Alan M vs getting accolades as crapsguy24.
The upside is getting ones name out there for future money making opportunities. But that would work if you are in a community where you are the golden boy, giving advice, making comments and viewed as the "pro".
Thats what people want. They want to be recognized, well regarded by getting the public slap on the back by the masses. And when that slap on the back doesnt occur, or stops occurring ...then its time to run away.

there is great upside. Heck shackelford uses wov as a away to elevate himself in the eyes of the gambling world....and hopefully his name recognitin gets him some paydays...consult work etc. Shackelford has the power to ban or delete things that might challenge his elevation. However here Alan didnt have that power. But he could have been seeking the same that shackelford sought......keeping his name out there. There is an upside to that.

Maybe for you there is no upside that is valuable to you. But to others needing to keep their name relevant , using their real name is a decision they choose. But once you make that decision....and bathe in the glow of name recognition and building your brand when the masses bow to you.....then you have to accept there might be times that the masses will turn on you....often for something that you said.

so yes...take the good with the bad.

[mickeycrimm]

Alan was dangerous to novice gamblers. He is/was a B celebrity. The words of celebrities carry weight. He was wrong, but never in doubt, on many concepts in gambling but his words carry weight with the unknowing. "Who should I believe, Alan Mendelson, whose reputation is beyond reproach, or some anonymous high school dropout ex homeless drifter?" He once said "If you worked for me and you said the answer is 1 in 6 I would fire you."

[quahaug]

I'm a nobody whether I'm anonymous or not. What difference does it make? Redietz could be scmeditz for all I care. It's the same content same credibility.

[quahaug]

Or lack of credibility. I almost forgot scmeditz never did post any of that credibility building info that was supposedly sent to Alan.

[pepe]

most people here are pseudonymous not anonymous. the equivalent of "tripfags" or "namefags" on a real anon forum

[redietz]

I'm a nobody whether I'm anonymous or not. What difference does it make? Redietz could be scmeditz for all I care. It's the same content same credibility.

Yeah, except for the fact that an anonymous schmo doesn't get affected in the real world. It has real effect on the person posting.

The fact some of you are making this argument says it all. I mean, c'mon, get real. If I say one thing wrong out of a hundred, that's out there in the real world to be cherry plucked as evidence I have no idea what I'm talking about. There is no upside.

There are reasons all of you folks are anonymous. So don't give me the "what difference does it make?" gobbledygook. You're scaredy-cats that your posts will affect you in the real world.

Ego as a factor on this board? You gotta be kidding me. I think LarryS is confusing himself with everybody else...not that there's anything wrong with that...LOL.

[redietz]

Or lack of credibility. I almost forgot scmeditz never did post any of that credibility building info that was supposedly sent to Alan.

I do not recall ever, at any point or in any post, saying I would post anything. Quahaug must have me confused with somebody else. But, gee, quahaug, no problemo. Just furnish an address, and I'll send it along.

I would use my third place finish in the invitation-only Wise Guys last season (www.vegaswiseguys.com) as a point of braggadocio, but the fact is I led the thing for two months, and I am bitterly disgusted with the finish. I needed an Alabama cover in the title game to become the only living two-time Wise Guys champion. I will probably not get that chance again.