Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 241

Thread: Dan deleting posts and threads ?

  1. #41
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Don't worry about, pay attention to, or even believe a word that alan writes, as he admits he lies on this forum.

    Remember?

    He said to the effect that there is no reason to believe that what he posts is true.

    True confession.
    What I said is why would anyone who posts using his real name would report his casino profits on a Web forum like this?

    Also why would anyone using their own name report their true losses?

    You don't know if I won one dollar or if I lost one dollar and it's none of your business.

    By the way do you actually practice law with all of the time you spend on gambling forums?

  2. #42
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by blackhole View Post
    I just went to that R.Singer containment thread where Dan dumps the troll posts. A quick count of the last couple of pages there shows, Mickey 15, Bill Yung 7, Alan 5, Rob 5,

    Looks like Mickey gets the troll trophy.
    I'm a target of the other three. They gang up on me. You are part of that gang known as the confederacy of dunces. Don't target me and I won't target you.
    There are twice as many so-called AP's; and certainly more gamblers than non-gamblers, here.

    Besides, as Coach already noted, asking questions about contradictions and inaccuracies, which you can't answer, isn't trolling.
    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)].

  3. #43
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Sort of a "grand experiment."
    See, another similarity to looking for a "theory of everything". Fantasy details coupled with wringing of hands.

    In 1973, Jean-Marc Deshouillers showed that all integers are the sum of at most 159 prime numbers.
    Every now and then I come across something truly mind blowing. What the hell does something like that really mean? Perhaps, that one must focus on all the numbers instead of just the primes.
    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)].

  4. #44
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    By the way do you actually practice law with all of the time you spend on gambling forums?
    No, I don't "practice," I've got it down pat.

    Like how some wag once joked "Nixon saw "Deep Throat" four times but he hasn't got it down Pat yet."
    What, Me Worry?

  5. #45
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Like how some wag once joked "Nixon saw "Deep Throat" four times but he hasn't got it down Pat yet."
    Tricky Dick should've shown her his nuts.



    Maybe he would've at lest got a cookie.

  6. #46
    Originally Posted by Bill Yung View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by Bill Yung View Post
    Dan can't really "axe" shit. He and you just think you can. It's all in your heads.
    Yes, you are definitely the sockpuppet king, garnabby. Not using the same name on different sites means you are covering up who you are and your track record. You've go a lot to hide,little man. But he can make it tough for you to continue to troll here.
    I just meant that, eventually, whenever Dan bans me, or I no longer have fun here, nothing Dan or you can do will affect my life, or the truth at large. This is just a low-income inconsequential talk forum.
    You could never stay away. You live to troll.
    "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

  7. #47
    Originally Posted by Bill Yung View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by blackhole View Post
    I just went to that R.Singer containment thread where Dan dumps the troll posts. A quick count of the last couple of pages there shows, Mickey 15, Bill Yung 7, Alan 5, Rob 5,

    Looks like Mickey gets the troll trophy.
    I'm a target of the other three. They gang up on me. You are part of that gang known as the confederacy of dunces. Don't target me and I won't target you.
    There are twice as many so-called AP's; and certainly more gamblers than non-gamblers, here.

    Besides, as Coach already noted, asking questions about contradictions and inaccuracies, which you can't answer, isn't trolling.
    What contradictions and inaccuracies? Its not my problem if you don't understand it. And I'm not fond of explaining things to those that have trolled me. You are a perfect example. No answer is good enough for you. So it's wasted effort to respond to any question you have.
    "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. #48
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    You could never stay away. You live to troll.
    Name:  7-most-awesome-internet-trolls-of-all-times-02.jpg
Views: 616
Size:  83.1 KB

    You have to "troll" yourself to find out what's in there.
    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)].

  9. #49
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    No answer is good enough for you.
    Be wary of answers.
    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)].

  10. #50
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Don't worry about, pay attention to, or even believe a word that alan writes, as he admits he lies on this forum.

    Remember?

    He said to the effect that there is no reason to believe that what he posts is true.

    True confession.
    What I said is why would anyone who posts using his real name would report his casino profits on a Web forum like this?

    Also why would anyone using their own name report their true losses?

    You don't know if I won one dollar or if I lost one dollar and it's none of your business.

    By the way do you actually practice law with all of the time you spend on gambling forums?
    You know the WoV rejects want and need it to be true that you lose, so even if you had said you've been a winner like me, the only thing they'd accept is that you lose. Exactly the way all players who truly lose would react. People who's real identities are known are required to be treated as such by all these anonymous cowardly AP's. It just can't be that we have better lives than the little people.

    Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the resulting bliss.

  11. #51
    I am NOT an "anonymous cowardly AP."

    My identity is known by quite a few; I've attended two WoVCons, broken bread with the wiz and others, gambled a bit with them as well.

    Nor am I an AP: I am a recreational gambler with a lifetime loss (accurate records) of slightly over fifty grand.

    The point I was making is self-evident: if alan says his posts may or may not be truthful, then there is zero point to attaching a shred of credibility to anything he says.
    What, Me Worry?

  12. #52
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Don't worry about, pay attention to, or even believe a word that alan writes, as he admits he lies on this forum.

    Remember?

    He said to the effect that there is no reason to believe that what he posts is true.

    True confession.
    What I said is why would anyone who posts using his real name would report his casino profits on a Web forum like this?

    Also why would anyone using their own name report their true losses?

    You don't know if I won one dollar or if I lost one dollar and it's none of your business.

    By the way do you actually practice law with all of the time you spend on gambling forums?
    You know the WoV rejects want and need it to be true that you lose, so even if you had said you've been a winner like me, the only thing they'd accept is that you lose. Exactly the way all players who truly lose would react. People who's real identities are known are required to be treated as such by all these anonymous cowardly AP's. It just can't be that we have better lives than the little people.

    Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the resulting bliss.
    I really don't care if any of you, civilians or AP's, have won or lost over the years. Sure we might joke about it, but in reality, I really dont care.

    As for you, I'm probably the only AP here that said it's possible you've won what you've said you did. I just don't believe the baloney about your "strategy" having anything to do with it. No different then the guy that hit the MegaBucks slot jackpot twice or any other schlub that wins these huge lotteries. Just plain variance.

  13. #53
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Don't worry about, pay attention to, or even believe a word that alan writes, as he admits he lies on this forum.

    Remember?

    He said to the effect that there is no reason to believe that what he posts is true.

    True confession.
    What I said is why would anyone who posts using his real name would report his casino profits on a Web forum like this?

    Also why would anyone using their own name report their true losses?

    You don't know if I won one dollar or if I lost one dollar and it's none of your business.

    By the way do you actually practice law with all of the time you spend on gambling forums?
    You know the WoV rejects want and need it to be true that you lose, so even if you had said you've been a winner like me, the only thing they'd accept is that you lose. Exactly the way all players who truly lose would react. People who's real identities are known are required to be treated as such by all these anonymous cowardly AP's. It just can't be that we have better lives than the little people.

    Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the resulting bliss.
    Lol you’re a WOV reject.
    #FreeTyde

  14. #54
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post

    What I said is why would anyone who posts using his real name would report his casino profits on a Web forum like this?

    Also why would anyone using their own name report their true losses?

    You don't know if I won one dollar or if I lost one dollar and it's none of your business.

    By the way do you actually practice law with all of the time you spend on gambling forums?
    You know the WoV rejects want and need it to be true that you lose, so even if you had said you've been a winner like me, the only thing they'd accept is that you lose. Exactly the way all players who truly lose would react. People who's real identities are known are required to be treated as such by all these anonymous cowardly AP's. It just can't be that we have better lives than the little people.

    Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the resulting bliss.
    I really don't care if any of you, civilians or AP's, have won or lost over the years. Sure we might joke about it, but in reality, I really dont care.

    As for you, I'm probably the only AP here that said it's possible you've won what you've said you did. I just don't believe the baloney about your "strategy" having anything to do with it. No different then the guy that hit the MegaBucks slot jackpot twice or any other schlub that wins these huge lotteries. Just plain variance.
    And you're right--nobody SHOULD care if anyone else wins or loses. And I have the same mindset as you--AP's certainly can win also, but they need the same amount of good luck as I do. Playing a game with a 1 or 2 percent theoretical advantage after adding in slot club perks is not going to cut it as the reason why. Neither is claiming to count two tables while playing at one, or saying a player is able to hide their profitable activities via counting cards from the eyes in the sky, the gaming computer programs, or the pit bosses. The math makes it all sound nice. However, reality beats its own drum.

  15. #55
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post

    You know the WoV rejects want and need it to be true that you lose, so even if you had said you've been a winner like me, the only thing they'd accept is that you lose. Exactly the way all players who truly lose would react. People who's real identities are known are required to be treated as such by all these anonymous cowardly AP's. It just can't be that we have better lives than the little people.

    Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the resulting bliss.
    I really don't care if any of you, civilians or AP's, have won or lost over the years. Sure we might joke about it, but in reality, I really dont care.

    As for you, I'm probably the only AP here that said it's possible you've won what you've said you did. I just don't believe the baloney about your "strategy" having anything to do with it. No different then the guy that hit the MegaBucks slot jackpot twice or any other schlub that wins these huge lotteries. Just plain variance.
    And you're right--nobody SHOULD care if anyone else wins or loses. And I have the same mindset as you--AP's certainly can win also, but they need the same amount of good luck as I do. Playing a game with a 1 or 2 percent theoretical advantage after adding in slot club perks is not going to cut it as the reason why. Neither is claiming to count two tables while playing at one, or saying a player is able to hide their profitable activities via counting cards from the eyes in the sky, the gaming computer programs, or the pit bosses. The math makes it all sound nice. However, reality beats its own drum.
    Then I'm sure you can use your pull with all these casino execs you supposedly know to get them to install some 10/8 Jacks or Better to sucker all us AP's into the casino and beat us out of all of our money.
    "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

  16. #56
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    And I have the same mindset as you--AP's certainly can win also, but they need the same amount of good luck as I do.
    Wrong! AP's play with an advantage. You play at a disadvantage. Big difference (longterm). Let's hear what Dan Druff has to say on the subject.

    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    While numbers like "99% return" and "101% return" sound insignificant, they're actually not.
    After a relatively small number of hands, the luck will flatten out. You can't play an extended period of time at 99% return and win, and you can't play an extended period of time at 101% and lose (provided you're playing correctly).
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Rob, you realize that what you're claiming is virtually impossible, right?
    If you play a certain number of -EV video poker hands, it is just about mathematically impossible, barring an absolute miracle of luck, to come out ahead.
    Next mathematically 100% wrong Singer statement...

    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Playing a game with a 1 or 2 percent theoretical advantage after adding in slot club perks is not going to cut it as the reason why.
    Seems like we need a repeat from Dan on this one.

    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    While numbers like "99% return" and "101% return" sound insignificant, they're actually not.
    After a relatively small number of hands, the luck will flatten out. You can't play an extended period of time at 99% return and win, and you can't play an extended period of time at 101% and lose (provided you're playing correctly).
    Of course what does Dan know about gambling math...He is only a professional poker player.

  17. #57
    KJ: Big BOLD BLUE ink? Nice touch!

  18. #58
    Dan and KJ....simple minds think alike. Yes we've seen that. Once a mind is made up that +EV means you win and -EV means you lose, the struggle begins.

    And what you're doing is making the same critical mistake all AP's make: applying long term rules to short term play. That is, by definition, just plain dumb.

    A session is a session. It is bound by the actions and results of that session alone. Just like one single hand is. A percent or two or three is very rarely going to make any difference whatsoever to the results being positive or negative for any given session. So for you fools to keep saying the same misguided point that "it's very easy for you to win a single session or five straight using your strategy" but then contradict yourselves repeatedly by adding in the feel-good but misinformed caveat "however, because you're playing at under 100% EV, you'll lose overall" it only shows how mathematically challenged you really are and how you rely on vague contradictions to try and make your point.

    This, you people never explain. And that's because what you're trying to get past everyone is how, when I get ahead, I'm DUE to lose because you say so. Do you even realize how stupid that sounds? You're saying there's a good chance I'll win a single session, but after playing 50 or 6 or 10 or 8 or 20 or whatever, suddenly that "good chance" at some point has to be reduced to a "not so good a chance" for a bunch of sessions. In other words, you're arbitrarily changing the math probability for the outcome of a single session. That's another word for "due".

    Yes, there's a difference between advanced college math and street math.

  19. #59
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Dan and KJ....simple minds think alike. Yes we've seen that. Once a mind is made up that +EV means you win and -EV means you lose, the struggle begins.

    And what you're doing is making the same critical mistake all AP's make: applying long term rules to short term play. That is, by definition, just plain dumb.

    A session is a session. It is bound by the actions and results of that session alone. Just like one single hand is. A percent or two or three is very rarely going to make any difference whatsoever to the results being positive or negative for any given session. So for you fools to keep saying the same misguided point that "it's very easy for you to win a single session or five straight using your strategy" but then contradict yourselves repeatedly by adding in the feel-good but misinformed caveat "however, because you're playing at under 100% EV, you'll lose overall" it only shows how mathematically challenged you really are and how you rely on vague contradictions to try and make your point.

    This, you people never explain. And that's because what you're trying to get past everyone is how, when I get ahead, I'm DUE to lose because you say so. Do you even realize how stupid that sounds? You're saying there's a good chance I'll win a single session, but after playing 50 or 6 or 10 or 8 or 20 or whatever, suddenly that "good chance" at some point has to be reduced to a "not so good a chance" for a bunch of sessions. In other words, you're arbitrarily changing the math probability for the outcome of a single session. That's another word for "due".

    Yes, there's a difference between advanced college math and street math.
    There's also a difference between advanced college math and Singer math.
    "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. #60
    Question for the APs: why do people lose playing on +EV video poker machines?

    (I'm really not looking for an answer. Just pointing out that people do lose with that +EV you all worship.)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Regarding recent trolling threads/messages here
    By Dan Druff in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-10-2018, 11:47 AM
  2. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 01-17-2018, 05:35 AM
  3. Hundreds of Threads.......
    By mr jjj in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 08-28-2013, 09:14 PM
  4. NEW POLICY: I'm now deleting posts.
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-06-2013, 08:46 AM
  5. Kneeland No Longer Posts?
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-20-2011, 08:09 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
  •