The bible is nothing but a bunch of fictional stories, period! The fact that ANY AP believes in that bullshit is quite sad.Originally Posted by Bob21
The bible is nothing but a bunch of fictional stories, period! The fact that ANY AP believes in that bullshit is quite sad.Originally Posted by Bob21
I don't care that you're Christian Bob but you're not even making an intelligible assertion here. Surely you acknowledge the practical necessity of subdividing the 29.5 day lunar month into uniform clusters of days?
Easter is always on the 1st sunday after the 4th full moon after christmas. It can be anywhere from march 22 to april 25. This was established in the 4th century.
"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
If i understand correctly, when someone gets nuked at WOV it means Mike doesn't want to hear from or about that person anymore on the forum.Originally Posted by kewlJI actually emailed Richard Munchkin last night Just as I said and despite that I don't find Singer credible, I still encouraged Munchkin to have Singer on to tell the story so people can decide for themselves. I would have emailed Dancer as well but I don't know Dancer to talk to, where as I do know Munchkin. I do think Singer should have the opportunity to tell his story and let people decide for themselves.Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I also continue to be surprised there has been no discussion at WoV. I am sure such a discussion would probably be biased against Rob, because of circumstances, but still there should be discussion, so people could decide for themselves. I am wondering if management shut down any discussion?
If I had a means to contact Shackleford, I would do so and suggest that he meet up and interview Singer, just as he apparently did when Singer's book came out. He could either video the interview as Mike likes to do, or at very least interview Singer and blog about it. Since Mike recently updated his blog concerning the original Singer system claim, there is apparently at least some interest in Singer, and I think this latest double-up bug would garner a lot of interest.
Last edited by AxelWolf; 05-22-2019 at 11:57 PM.
For a $5 bet:
40,000 RF
3,000. SF
8,000. Quad A's
6,000. Quad J's, Q's, & K's
4,000. Quad 2's, 3's, & 4's
2,500. Quad 5's thru 10's
400. Full House
250. Flush
200. Straight
150. 3oaK
100. 2-pr.
50. Hi pr.
Just for fun, I wrote out the true pay table found on most of the $1 SDBP machines I played from 2004-mid 2009 when the highest denomination on the machine is $10....with DU enabled, of course. A 10:1 bump. And there were times that I played the $1 thru $25 machines as well--even more mind-boggling. Yet this is really nothing compared to the 40:1 improvement on the occasional 25c thru $10 machines I played. Although, for my purposes anything less than quads was ignored other than when I was searching for this kind of play.
If that's not GWAE, what is??
Last edited by Rob.Singer; 05-23-2019 at 04:16 AM.
So I take it that on the $1 level if you hit 4 Queens for $600 you switched it up to $6000. Is that correct?Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
"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
Why do you care about going on GWAE? It seems as if you went out of your way to burn bridges over the years. Why is this important to you at this point? TBH, given your past, I think you will have to come up with solid proof before most people will believe this to be true. It might take a full-time PR team, and only after you managed to save the US from another 911 just to repair your reputation.Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
RobS, if you suddenly proved without a doubt to everyone that everything you said you did with the Game King poker machines over a 5 to 6 year period was absolutely true does not change anything about what type of an individual you are. You found enjoyment and entertainment when other members lost loved ones, disgusting!
AxelWolf wrote:
It might take a full-time PR team, and only after you managed to save the US from another 911 just to repair your reputation.
I agree, and that is never going to happen!
Last edited by BoSox; 05-23-2019 at 08:14 AM.
Two comments about Axelwolfs posts.
1. About "proof given Rob's past". This has been my point for a week now. People seem to have an issue with my credibility statements, but that is what we are talking about.
2. About Mike (Wizard) wanting nothing to do with people once banned. This seems bizarre to me. Besides being petty and showing the inability to grow and move forward, there is the issue that he is supposed to be running a gambling related forum. If this really is the big and important story that it would be if true, ignoring it is lame. That is a disservice to members of that supposed gambling related forum.
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I disagree with this one, kewlJ. "Singer" has referred to Shackleford as a "failed AP" about 500 times, and pulls up his name every time he wants to list high profile gamblers who "Singer" says should be poster children for why APing does not work. The play "Singer" allegedly pulled off is probably extinct, so there is limited value going forward to feature the topic. It's a historical footnote, pretty much. Interesting, but not of much value to any readership. So all you're costing the readership is a really interesting historical topic, not a practical advantage or tool. I can see why he'd veto the issue. And I'm no Shackleford cheerleader.
To be fair, you did say something (and I don’t have the exact quote, maybe you can help) about hassling him the rest of his life.Originally Posted by kewlJ
Can’t speak for the Wiz, but I get why he wouldn’t want to bother with you or anyone who threatens that. In regards to some others, it’s his option.
He is not that important of a person that anyone’s life is hurt by not being part of his life or forum.
Fair enough Boz. However I have since expressed regret about some of the things I said as well as the way I said them. To me that is what growing and moving forward is.
However further discussion of such a topic is sort of off topic. Aren't we discussing Rob and his big moment. Lol. (Not sure how much further off topic we can venture though after the religious side track)
Yes on this game and on $1 - $10 machines.Originally Posted by mickeycrimmSo I take it that on the $1 level if you hit 4 Queens for $600 you switched it up to $6000. Is that correct?Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I don't disagree with that last statement. I was overly harsh throughout all of this. I did not cause all of it, but I got caught up in it and on forums I became someone I wasn't. Like I've explained, if I were really like any of that, my 41-year marriage wouldn't have lasted a year.Originally Posted by AxelWolfWhy do you care about going on GWAE? It seems as if you went out of your way to burn bridges over the years. Why is this important to you at this point? TBH, given your past, I think you will have to come up with solid proof before most people will believe this to be true. It might take a full-time PR team, and only after you managed to save the US from another 911 just to repair your reputation.Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I only used "GWAE" as an acronym and I wasn't referring to the Dancer show above. I thought about my request a bit more and recently told mickey I didn't think it'd be a good idea to go on GWAE even if they asked--which I don't believe will ever happen anyway, for just the reason you mentioned.
If Dancer can't separate his personal feeling then he doesn't belong doing that show. That is what journalism is about. Dancer would have a right to his opinion same as me or anyone else, but denying Rob the chance to tell the story and other in the gambling community the chance to hear it (and form their own opinion) is just wrong.
They didn’t take that thread about me being on GWAE down.Originally Posted by kewlJ
"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
Munchkin is quite capable of being objective. Just let him take the lead which he usually does anyway. Dancer only chimes in with stupid shit. Munchkin does the real interviews.
No Mick, it’s still there. No reason it should have been removed.Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThey didn’t take that thread about me being on GWAE down.Originally Posted by kewlJ
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gamb.../5/#post715235
To "their" credit, no they didn't Mickey. But I didn't see wizard comment and I thought that was small of him. People want to hear his opinions on legit gambling topics. Plus he knows that him not weighing in diminishes the discussion and it is likely to die quicker.Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThey didn’t take that thread about me being on GWAE down.Originally Posted by kewlJ
So while the discussion was allowed and I give credit for that, it still was done so with bias. People like wizard need to be bigger about this when it comes to legit gambling topics. Injecting personal bias is abusing the platform. IMO.
The thing I’m trying to understand is why do people think it would be hard for someone to know about this play in 2009 (when Kane and Nestor were caught), and the exact sequence of the play today. A lot of people at that time and now knew about this play, including the exact sequence to make it work. Here’s a a quick recap.
- IGT and probably all the other slot manufacturers. Once this bug was caught, I’m sure companies making slots knew about this play and checked to make sure their slots didn’t have a similar bug. This is the type of information that is shared between competitors. It’s in everybody’s interest to make sure there are no bugs in slot machines.
- the casinos that were most impacted. I get that a memo came out immediately telling casinos to disable the double up feuture, but I’m sure several casinos also knew the exact play too.
- the 25 year old USC coder who figured it out and probably all his friends and his friend’s friends knew about it. There is no reason to sign any secrecy agreement once they knew how to activate it because casinos were immediately sent a memo to deactivate the double up feature and an upgrade program was sent out. It wasn’t complicated to stop this play.
- Kane and Nestor
- the state of Pennsylvania and possibly a couple bordering states. Lol. We know Nestor had a big mouth and took half the population of Pennsylvania to the casinos with him when he tried to exploit it. So a lot of the people in the Northeast knew about this play and the right sequence to activate it.
- law-enforcement officials, prosecutors, etc. The ones intimate with the case would’ve known exactly how this play went down.
I wasn’t in the gambling world in 2009 but I’m starting to wonder if I didn’t even know about this play back then. Lol
The point being it’s not too hard for me to see how someone in the gaming community, especially in Las Vegas, would have known about this play and also the correct sequence back in 2009, and especially now. Any intelligent person should be able to get this information.
I don’t buy that the wired article got the sequence wrong on purpose. When the wired article came out, this play had long since stopped, and the slot machines had the upgraded program. Someone could easily learn the correct sequence from many different sources. What would be the purpose of the wired article getting the sequence wrong?
This does not prove or disprove if Rob knew about it, or found out about it in 2004.
It is somewhat suspicious that Rob gave the winnings to his kids and didn’t save his tax returns or the WG forms if he wanted to later prove his claims.
It doesn’t really matter to me either way but I do think Kj brings up some good points. Also, since the play is understood through all the Kane and Nester articles, I don’t know what value there is for someone to explain how they exploited it on a radio program. Others have said the same thing.
Just my two cents worth since I know everybody’s waiting to see what I have to say on this critical topic. Lol
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
