"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
Mickey don't be naive. In some states anyone can walk into a print shop and buy a notary stamp with their name on it. The only reason you can't do it in Calif is because in 1988 while I was working at FOX I did an investigation called "drive by fraud." Scammers would drive by a house, take down the STREET ADDRESS and a quick description of the property, and then using a notary stamp FILE A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP and take a mortgage on the hiuse. My investigation changed the law in California so that only REAL notaries could get a notary stamp. I testified before the legislature to get the law passed.
I think I could buy a California stamp online.
https://www.acornsales.com/notary-se...RoCPXUQAvD_BwE
Thanks for posting. Of course the California State Law only applies to California businesses, such as printer shops where stamps are made.
In 1988 when the law was passed there was no Internet.
Add online sites like this to the problem we all face for fraud and identity theft.
"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
See, Mr. Mendelson, this is why people consider you a shyster.
Obviously you paraphrased what I posted, and then stated a speculative and false conclusion based on your paraphrasing. LOL. The easy way to identify a "language shyster" in this case is that you did not include the original posting of mine in a quote, because that would demonstrate that your paraphrasing was inaccurate.
This is something that would be flagged with an "F" in any introductory journalism class. So I have to assume your clumsy attempt is purposeful, you being an intrepid reporter and all.
Coach, you seem like a curious boy. I'm surprised that you haven't been asking Argentino similar questions, given that his storylines seem a tad shakier than mine. Go ahead, coach, see if you can muster up some fair and balanced questioning here. You can do it. You're a big boy.
78255585899=317*13723*17989=(310+7)*[(13730-7)*(100*100+7979+10)]-->LOVE avatar@137_371_179_791, or 137_371_17[3^2]_7[3^2]1, 1=V-->Ace, low. 78255585899-->99858555287=(99858555288-1)=[-1+(72*2227)*(722777-100000)]={-1+(72*2227)*[(2000+700777+20000)-100000]}-->1_722_227_277_772_1. 7×8×2×5×5×5×8×5×8×9×9=362880000=(1000000000-6√97020000-100000)-->169_721. (7/8×2/5×5/5×8/5×8/9×9)={[(-.1+.9)]^2×(6+1)}-->1961=√4*2.24; (1/7×8/2×5/5×5/8×5/8×9/9)={1/[7×(-.2+1)^2]}-->1721=[(10*10/4)/(√4+110)].
I have to provide a quote of myself to demonstrate Mr. Mendelson's purposeful use of inaccurate paraphrasing. Boy, that is bad journalism, Mr. Mendelson. Somebody doesn't say something, but you paraphrase and say they did. Tsk, tsk.
If you'll notice, I said (and I'm accurately paraphrasing here, to highlight how it should be done for Mr. Mendelson's professional benefit) who in his right mind would play a 300-1 future with a tax burden when you could bet it offshore? I stand by that.
Now here's the kicker, Mr. Mendelson. Pay close attention now. To have a tax burden, one must win the 300-1 future at the offshore. Why don't you be a good intrepid reporter, do the research, and figure out how many college basketball, college football, NBA, NFL, MLB, college baseball, women's college hoops, WNBA, NHL, or college hockey teams won titles at 300-1 or more in the last decade?
This may require more than one google search, so take your time.
I think Alan, Rob, myself, and a few others should just stop posting on this site. Then we should sit back and just watch the site eventually vanish.
Of course the assholes Kiwlj, Redditz, Mickey, and the other 4 or 5 alleged Ap's will come out with guns a blazing and post like crazy. But truthfully they have nothing to say and would only fade away. What are they going to talk about? Let's face it, how many people even phony AP's could take much more of Kiwlj's gambling fairy tales, or try to figure out what Redditz is saying while communicating with earth from Saturn? How many more pictures of unknown casinos scattered all over the country in places no one even knew existed does one want to look at? (goggle has a lot more details if anyone is really interested in visiting one of these shitholes)
Without Alan and Rob back and forth arguments, how much other content is actually on this site? I'm up for the challenge, hope the others are also.
I like how Mickey tries to talk his way out of the difference between 198% and 51% in the craps play thread. The other guy did a computer simulation, while Mickey stands around to talk about no one knowing the pure math of the bet.
Looks like Crimm is as dead as KJ in the believability department.
78255585899=317*13723*17989=(310+7)*[(13730-7)*(100*100+7979+10)]-->LOVE avatar@137_371_179_791, or 137_371_17[3^2]_7[3^2]1, 1=V-->Ace, low. 78255585899-->99858555287=(99858555288-1)=[-1+(72*2227)*(722777-100000)]={-1+(72*2227)*[(2000+700777+20000)-100000]}-->1_722_227_277_772_1. 7×8×2×5×5×5×8×5×8×9×9=362880000=(1000000000-6√97020000-100000)-->169_721. (7/8×2/5×5/5×8/5×8/9×9)={[(-.1+.9)]^2×(6+1)}-->1961=√4*2.24; (1/7×8/2×5/5×5/8×5/8×9/9)={1/[7×(-.2+1)^2]}-->1721=[(10*10/4)/(√4+110)].
I didn't do the math for YOUR benefit because you are so braindead you are beyond help. One thing is certain, you are incapable of coming up with the correct answer yourself. You have to rely on others. So you are in a quandary as to who is right, Stickman or me.
First, when Stickman said 51% edge that meant a 151% return. All Stickman did with the simulation is make an estimate because he didn't know the exact math to use, and he couldn't punch the exact numbers into the simulation.If you think I'm wrong here's your chance to rub my nose in it. There are plenty of math sites on the internet where you can ask and get answers by college math professors. Here is the question to ask:
What is the probability of rolling the dice exactly 13 times without producing a 7?
Report back what these math professors told you.
And I'll refine my answer on the 198% since I used a rounded number the first time.
10.7 X 50 = a total wager of $535
Payoff is $527.51 (98.6% of $535) + $500 = $1027.51
$1027.51 divided by the total wager, $535, = 192%.
"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
Funny stuff again. Kew's becoming so unnerved over this that he's saying Alan takes "traffic advice" from me. Of course, because he wants to believe I drive an RV between my houses. Dopey----that's why I have TWO RV's!
While it's an ongoing joy watching the anonymous clowns from WoV trying to claim Dan is some type of "gaming authority" because he speaks in the theoretical, one cannot underestimate the entertainment value of kew as he gets rattled beyond belief! I just wish I were there at this time. I've never seen a guy with one of those lithps studder.
First off, "pure math" already refers to something more specific than the way you used the term.
Secondly, I didn't even read this promotion's details. I have very little interest in or time for gambling math per se. At any rate, gambling math doesn't call for a lot of if any rigorous mathematical proof or debate.
Thirdly, aren't computer simulations for engineering, math, or whatever, supposed to be about not being able to (easily) "punch in the exact numbers"? Like for generating the first million prime numbers to check out some of the longstanding unsolved conjectures and theorems about primes? Did you really mean only that the guy who did the simulation didn't properly set it up, he misunderstood that promotion's details, and/or he is a poor computer programmer?
Then why do you continue to search for others to prove things out here? Why does anyone have to go to Montana to see you play? To see where you live? To go to Vegas to read stuff going back forty years on Red, that only he seems to be in possession of? And on and on. Post up your own proofs, and simple evidence of what you claim to do. Find something by someone with a real name in the gambling industry who writes that slot machines offer a high-level income. Ask the guy who did the simulation to show you his code. Find out his side of the story. Have him post any corrections and other edits to his casino internet site.
Still waiting just to hear about how poker EV is different from that of blackjack, and, hence, how the long-run distributions differ in comparison; how no one has to lose at blackjack; how KJ "blows through" a deck or two playing heads-ups, five times a day to play a hundred thousand hands a year, but still manages to count one or two more tables. If you want to continue to endorse KJ, you have to back up also what you do and don't write about it. And, how it was that you wrote on the WoV that you lived out of a hotel at the corner of such and such somewhere in Montana.
You skirt the comments and questions that you, apparently, can't acknowledge and truthfully reply to other than with vague isolated and idiotic responses such as "brain-dead and beyond help".
Fine. If that's all there is to it, then ask the Wizard. You should have had the one precise answer a long time ago.
Last edited by Bill Yung; 11-14-2018 at 08:52 AM.
78255585899=317*13723*17989=(310+7)*[(13730-7)*(100*100+7979+10)]-->LOVE avatar@137_371_179_791, or 137_371_17[3^2]_7[3^2]1, 1=V-->Ace, low. 78255585899-->99858555287=(99858555288-1)=[-1+(72*2227)*(722777-100000)]={-1+(72*2227)*[(2000+700777+20000)-100000]}-->1_722_227_277_772_1. 7×8×2×5×5×5×8×5×8×9×9=362880000=(1000000000-6√97020000-100000)-->169_721. (7/8×2/5×5/5×8/5×8/9×9)={[(-.1+.9)]^2×(6+1)}-->1961=√4*2.24; (1/7×8/2×5/5×5/8×5/8×9/9)={1/[7×(-.2+1)^2]}-->1721=[(10*10/4)/(√4+110)].
This is one of hundreds of examples of Alan Mendelson acting like a shyster. Hundreds (plural)! Dishonest, sneaky, conniving, manipulating, intentionally twisting words. This IS Alan Mendelson and Shyster very accurately describes him.
As a matter of fact, his attempt to suggest that my use of the word has some sort of anti-Semitic meaning, when knew damn right well, it didn't and I was not using it in such a manner, was in itself a shyster (dishonest) move. Shyster is a perfect description of Alan Mendelson and his behavior on this site.
78255585899=317*13723*17989=(310+7)*[(13730-7)*(100*100+7979+10)]-->LOVE avatar@137_371_179_791, or 137_371_17[3^2]_7[3^2]1, 1=V-->Ace, low. 78255585899-->99858555287=(99858555288-1)=[-1+(72*2227)*(722777-100000)]={-1+(72*2227)*[(2000+700777+20000)-100000]}-->1_722_227_277_772_1. 7×8×2×5×5×5×8×5×8×9×9=362880000=(1000000000-6√97020000-100000)-->169_721. (7/8×2/5×5/5×8/5×8/9×9)={[(-.1+.9)]^2×(6+1)}-->1961=√4*2.24; (1/7×8/2×5/5×5/8×5/8×9/9)={1/[7×(-.2+1)^2]}-->1721=[(10*10/4)/(√4+110)].
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)