Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31

Thread: Proving one's claims

  1. #1
    A lot of effort is put in by posters on this board as to the notion of proving a claim.

    I submit that this is a complete waste of time; there is no need to prove anything.

    It's enough to simply make the claim, and then describe the basis for it.

    Demanding that tax returns or other records be produced is, frankly, lame.

    This is a message board, not a court of law.

    Take a man at his word or not; your choice, after weighing and sifting through what is posted.

    Some claims, such as Singer being well over a million ahead from VP, or alan's claim of 18 yo's in a row are so patently absurd, so blatantly false, as to be summarily dismissed out of hand by anyone with the ability to ponder, cogitate and judge.
    What, Me Worry?

  2. #2
    WoW! Probably your finest post ever MrV.

  3. #3
    So far both kewlj and MrV have virtually said the same thing.

    If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made.

    I can't prove a random shooter threw 18 yos in a row. Caesars didn't have the tape any longer when I asked for it.

    But I can prove my position on Rob Singer because it's on my website and on the videos. So stop lying about me.

  4. #4
    We listen, we weigh, then judge.

    End of story.
    What, Me Worry?

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    So far both kewlj and MrV have virtually said the same thing.

    If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made.
    Good lord, that is NOT what either MrV, nor kewlj said! What the fuck is wrong with you sir?

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    So far both kewlj and MrV have virtually said the same thing.

    If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made.
    Good lord, that is NOT what either MrV, nor kewlj said! What the fuck is wrong with you sir?
    I guess it's my college education that got in the way of your comprehension. You and MrV didn't say "If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made" I did. It was a declaratory statement in a different paragraph.

    A college education is a wonderful thing.

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    So far both kewlj and MrV have virtually said the same thing.

    If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made.
    Good lord, that is NOT what either MrV, nor kewlj said! What the fuck is wrong with you sir?

    And then, there are those of us who send along a copy of virtually every claim made (in a package), or a website link (as in the Heritage Sports Race to the Super Bowl Contest), or a published paper attached to an email, and certain intrepid reporters find themselves unable to go to the office to pick up the package, or vouch for the link, or somehow cannot open the email attachment with their phone.

    Coincidences? I guess so.

    Similar to the coincidence that a call was made to the NGC to see if sports bets could be paid with chips (LOL), but I guarantee no calls have been made to "casino managers" or professional blackjack players to verify or debunk KewlJ versus Argentino's information. Gee -- I wonder why not?

    Mr. Mendelson, drop the act. Your bias and agenda have been crystal clear for the last couple of years. You're not fooling anybody, your son included.

  8. #8
    Yeah, I don't want Rob to prove he has a 10" dick ether. Regardless of where he measures from.
    Take off that stupid mask you big baby.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    So far both kewlj and MrV have virtually said the same thing.

    If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made.
    Good lord, that is NOT what either MrV, nor kewlj said! What the fuck is wrong with you sir?
    I guess it's my college education that got in the way of your comprehension. You and MrV didn't say "If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made" I did. It was a declaratory statement in a different paragraph.

    A college education is a wonderful thing.
    Alan what year did this 18 yo's in a row happen? I just happend to meet a guy a few weeks ago who previously worked at Ceazars Palace in survalance. Apperantly he also worked at the Rio a well.

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    We listen, we weigh, then judge.

    End of story.
    Problem with that, Mr. V, is from a reasonable analysis of a good majority of your posts, you do not lead nor have not lead anything close to a remarkable life.....vanilla at best. So when anyone crosses such a person's path with information that could very easily make you feel smaller or even less significant than you really have been and are, you have no option other than to disbelieve, denigrate, and continue saying the same type things whenever you see the opportunity to do so.

    I would begin another argument about anything with LarryS if I were you V. Then go back and review the things you serve to the general public in such a setting. You'll see where I'm coming from.

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    So far both kewlj and MrV have virtually said the same thing.

    If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made.
    Good lord, that is NOT what either MrV, nor kewlj said! What the fuck is wrong with you sir?

    And then, there are those of us who send along a copy of virtually every claim made (in a package), or a website link (as in the Heritage Sports Race to the Super Bowl Contest), or a published paper attached to an email, and certain intrepid reporters find themselves unable to go to the office to pick up the package, or vouch for the link, or somehow cannot open the email attachment with their phone.

    Coincidences? I guess so.

    Similar to the coincidence that a call was made to the NGC to see if sports bets could be paid with chips (LOL), but I guarantee no calls have been made to "casino managers" or professional blackjack players to verify or debunk KewlJ versus Argentino's information. Gee -- I wonder why not?

    Mr. Mendelson, drop the act. Your bias and agenda have been crystal clear for the last couple of years. You're not fooling anybody, your son included.
    Alan I believe you got so far under red's skin with his phony "pr pkg." baloney that you're now the recipient of his craving to try and "get even" for the rest of time, once he picked up on the Jason thing whatever that really is. It's just as he did once he saw my real name---he uses it all the time thinking its hard on me, when in fact the Argentino name is worth far far more than the Singer name. After all, Singer's no different than most of the AP's around here....and redietz of course: no wife, no kids, no life. Me? I kinda look down on everybody here, and rightfully so.

  12. #12
    Well now Rob, that is indeed a haughty position you preach from.

    "Vanilla at best?"

    I'm a recreational gambler, and as such I'd never deign to try to teach others how to gamble.

    I am able however to use my brain effectively, and in doing so I've concluded that I do not believe your (implied?) brag that you've won a net of well over a million dollars playing video poker.

    Your methods, as I understand it, cannot turn your game +EV; at best you simply rearrange the furniture and hope to trip up the blind.

    In contrast I've concluded KJ, although a drama queen, is telling the truth about his blackjack advantage play.

    I could be wrong, but I size it up and call it as I see it: as do we all.

    Which does not mean you are a bad person; only that I think you are not in fact all that you purport to be.

    Oh sure you can write and argue well and are as relentless as LarryS., but that only serves to confuse, not convince.
    What, Me Worry?

  13. #13
    Rob I no longer see or read anything by redietz. He's dead to me. Just like his package of old magazine ads of contest results from years ago and alleged university studies that lack his name that he claimed to have authored.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Well now Rob, that is indeed a haughty position you preach from.

    "Vanilla at best?"

    I'm a recreational gambler, and as such I'd never deign to try to teach others how to gamble.

    I am able however to use my brain effectively, and in doing so I've concluded that I do not believe your (implied?) brag that you've won a net of well over a million dollars playing video poker.

    Your methods, as I understand it, cannot turn your game +EV; at best you simply rearrange the furniture and hope to trip up the blind.

    In contrast I've concluded KJ, although a drama queen, is telling the truth about his blackjack advantage play.

    I could be wrong, but I size it up and call it as I see it: as do we all.

    Which does not mean you are a bad person; only that I think you are not in fact all that you purport to be.

    Oh sure you can write and argue well and are as relentless as LarryS., but that only serves to confuse, not convince.
    Yet another fine post, well thought out and expressed, MrV. Whatever new vitamin regiment you are on, is working. Keep it up. (yuk, probably should have found better phrasing).

    Now I can argue the KJ - drama queen comment. I think it is more that I am a little thin-skinned and don't like when people cheapen my accomplishments that I have worked hard for, so I fight back. But if that is your perception, you are welcome to it.

    But, then you do have to admit that you too wear that drama queen crown. You have admitted numerous times that you like the drama that you create on numerous forums. And you have become quite good at doing so.

    But regardless, your conclusions as to who is genuine and who is not are spot on. As I always say, "it isn't that hard to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking". Congrats on passing that test, MrV.
    Last edited by kewlJ; 07-20-2018 at 06:58 PM.

  15. #15
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    But, then you do have to admit that you too wear that drama queen crown. You have admitted numerous times that you like the drama that you create on numerous forums. And you have become quite good at doing so.
    Well, I WAS a thesbian in junior high.

    Some design and build the cook pot; some produce food to toss in it; others simply like to stir it.
    What, Me Worry?

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    A lot of effort is put in by posters on this board as to the notion of proving a claim.

    I submit that this is a complete waste of time; there is no need to prove anything.

    It's enough to simply make the claim, and then describe the basis for it.

    Demanding that tax returns or other records be produced is, frankly, lame.

    This is a message board, not a court of law.

    Take a man at his word or not; your choice, after weighing and sifting through what is posted.

    Some claims, such as Singer being well over a million ahead from VP, or alan's claim of 18 yo's in a row are so patently absurd, so blatantly false, as to be summarily dismissed out of hand by anyone with the ability to ponder, cogitate and judge.
    this is true.

    The only way to prove the claims is to follow someone around and tag along for months and months(because anyone can have a good or bad short term run). Heck, anyone can have a bad year. KJ claims he had a few.. So following him around for one of those years would be meaningless as far as extrapolating over a 10 year period.

    And who is going to do that

    so all we can do is what rational people do......read the claim and based on the math and reality as we know it come to a conclusion that the claim is probably true or false.

  17. #17
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    So far both kewlj and MrV have virtually said the same thing.

    If claims can't be supported or proven they should not be made.
    Good lord, that is NOT what either MrV, nor kewlj said! What the fuck is wrong with you sir?

    And then, there are those of us who send along a copy of virtually every claim made (in a package), or a website link (as in the Heritage Sports Race to the Super Bowl Contest), or a published paper attached to an email, and certain intrepid reporters find themselves unable to go to the office to pick up the package, or vouch for the link, or somehow cannot open the email attachment with their phone.

    Coincidences? I guess so.

    Similar to the coincidence that a call was made to the NGC to see if sports bets could be paid with chips (LOL), but I guarantee no calls have been made to "casino managers" or professional blackjack players to verify or debunk KewlJ versus Argentino's information. Gee -- I wonder why not?

    Mr. Mendelson, drop the act. Your bias and agenda have been crystal clear for the last couple of years. You're not fooling anybody, your son included.
    "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

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Rob I no longer see or read anything by redietz. He's dead to me. Just like his package of old magazine ads of contest results from years ago and alleged university studies that lack his name that he claimed to have authored.
    Correcting Mr. Mendelson gets old and tedious. But I'll do it...again.

    1) "Tipsters or Gypsters?" was not "a contest," as Mr. Mendelson characterized it. I posted copies of "Tipsters or Gypsters?" rankings in the "Tipsters or Gypsters?" thread in Sports and Sports Betting. It was an annual summary and comparison of all plays made by the listed sports handicappers during football seasons. It was published in Las Vegas by former Seattle Times reporter, Mike McCusker. In addition, it also had a subjective summary for each handicapper discussing their personal history, reputation, and any consumer complaints. It included multi-year summaries on the back pages, so one could discern long-term results. The subjective blurbs and multi-year summaries were unique to "Tipsters or Gypsters?"

    2) Mr. Mendelson received the link to the 2015 Heritage Sports Race to the Super Bowl win in a PM. He acknowledged receiving it (privately). That wasn't very old.

    3) For some reason Mr. Mendelson has an issue because I didn't include the table of contents listing me as lead author on "The Gambling Personality: An Interactional Approach," which can be found in the Retro Road Trip thread. I didn't include it, because I wanted to see if he would make any dumb-ass comment questioning my authorship. You see, I originally included the table of contents in an email attachment, which was concurrent with mailing the other material he had requested. Mr. Mendelson then claimed that he could not open the attachment.

  19. #19
    First, Rob demands proof from everyone else but he has never provided proof of HIS claims. He could finally have done so with the tax returns supposed to go to Alan. But he welshed that one. Lead by example, Rob.

    2nd, can any AP really prove their claims without exposing their true identity? This is a problem for AP's and one that Rob exploits. For good reason AP's want their identity protected from casino personnel learning it. So Rob gets to say "These phony anonymous AP's won't put up proof of anything."

    And I've said this before. Most AP's don't mind Rob because he spreads faulty information about advantage play.
    "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. #20
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    First, Rob demands proof from everyone else but he has never provided proof of HIS claims. He could finally have done so with the tax returns supposed to go to Alan. But he welshed that one. Lead by example, Rob.

    2nd, can any AP really prove their claims without exposing their true identity? This is a problem for AP's and one that Rob exploits. For good reason AP's want their identity protected from casino personnel learning it. So Rob gets to say "These phony anonymous AP's won't put up proof of anything."

    And I've said this before. Most AP's don't mind Rob because he spreads faulty information about advantage play.
    Mickey you're so thick. You think casinos don't know who the AP's are and who's not? They're not fooling anybody who counts. Just because you and a bunch of others claiming to be ap's cowardly come on forums to spread your nonsense by way of unsupportable stories and winning, that's in no way the same as in casinos. You guys live to blab about how smart you think you are vs. the casinos, but you only do it from your armchairs because none of you win a thing and you know it.

    Again, NO TRUE SUCCESSFUL AP WOULD EVER COME ON A FORUM AND SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANY OF HIS OR HER PLAY.....OR LIFE.

    End of story, bozo.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The final word on proving Dice Influencing
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 277
    Last Post: 01-11-2018, 08:43 AM
  2. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-30-2014, 12:46 PM
  3. Claims I stole his royal
    By regnis in forum California/Western US Casinos
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-11-2014, 07:52 AM
  4. Replies: 63
    Last Post: 04-02-2013, 09:21 PM
  5. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-25-2013, 10:23 PM

Posting Permissions

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