Originally Posted by redietz View Post
Originally Posted by Ozzy View Post
Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
Below is Rob's interview with Shackleford. At the 19:40 mark Wizard asks Rob what proof he has that he made 2.8 million from the double up bug. Shackleford suggests Tax returns and Rob gives the same answer he has given us for several years that he threw out all the tax returns. Rob then volunteers that he "saved all the money won in a safe until he bought the Newell RV in 2011 for 1.6 Million." That is Rob offering up this Newell as proof of the double up bug! He is the one that tied the two together.

I don't know whether Wizard planned it and thought it out ahead of time or it just fell into place, but Wizard set the trap and Rob jumped in when he volunteered, he used the double up money to purchase the Newell.

You can say it doesn't matter and the two have nothing to do with each other, but it does. It became part of the equation when Rob volunteered that info. There are several answers that could have tripped Rob up. Buying Real Estate, depositing the money in a bank account or making a large purchase (like the Newell). All of these would have resulted in some documentation. I think Rob realized that the first two would have been a problem, but didn't seem to realize that a large purchase like 1.6 million dollars would. Shackleford laid the trap and Rob jumped right in.

What a pathetic interview by Rusty, total disgrace. He should be ashamed of himself. Other then Rob looking 25 years older then his GOAT Alan interview, he was his usual comedic self. Alan absolutely decimates Rusty as an interviewer, no contest whatsoever !

Shackleford did fine if this was an Entertainment Tonight interview, or Jimmy Fallon, and nobody's feelings were supposed to be hurt. On the other hand, since this was somebody claiming to have steamrollered casinos for a million and a half with the double up bug, there were a couple gaps. Like, "Where did you first play it?" comes to mind. That is an obvious starting point question, and there is no real reason for Rob to not answer that question if he's confessing to having used the bug.

If you'll notice, Rob's origin of the DU claim that Alan published on his site lacked any (and I mean ANY) specific details. It was noticeable by its lack of detail. Here's one of many good books that discusses the problem with lack of specificity, especially when information is "volunteered."

https://www.amazon.com/Practical-Int...9322259&sr=8-1


So, a few questions that Shackleford missed. Now bear in mind that someone conducting an interview that will potentially be seen by thousands of people should, in term of any journalism training, at least survey a couple of past interviews with the person for salient points, especially when there ARE ONLY A FEW PAST INTERVIEWS. If you don't do that as an interviewer, you're being lazy. No worse than Jimmy Fallon, but lazy nonetheless.

Here's a couple of obvious questions.

1) Where were the first couple of places you played the DU bug? What did it feel like? How much did you win? (These are really obvious starting points)
2) Was your claim of "machine telepathy" from the Alan interview just nonsense to cover your double up claim, or do you believe that? (The telepathy comment stands out so badly, it has to be addressed, especially by a math/science guy). That question easily leads to the next question.
3) Did you mislead Mendelson with those original interviews? If so, how can we verify that you're not misleading me and the audience in the current interview? What reasons to we have to believe you?
4) Where was the final place you played the DU bug? How much did you win? How did it feel to stop? Did you know that was your final time playing it as you played it?

And finally, the idea that Rob never told his family members, but then just magically made $1.6 million appear to buy a Newell -- well, that deserves some follow up questions or comments. Like, (5) "How did you explain the sudden million and a half available for luxury items to your family?" The problem with this follow-up (for Rob) is that he'd have to answer with something suggesting it wasn't surprising to his family. That likely means Rob would have to offer further details like these chunks of money appeared to his family before for other reasons. The problem with that answer is that you can then ask, "Like when?" and Rob would have to provide a detail of when and where a million showed up out of the blue previously.

Rob would have to report that he never told his family about the DU until the end. The question would then be why he didn't tell them. That makes it seem as if (A) Rob didn't trust his family to keep a lid on it or (B) Rob was concerned with legal ramifications. If he was concerned with legal ramifications, then you get into Rob having to be the only person with access to the safe. Otherwise the family is also on the hook legally. It's a real slippery slope, that money-in-the-safe bit.

And, finally, since Rob reported before his DU bug claim that the DU was illegal (on this very forum, I believe), Shackleford could have asked (6) why would you publicly state that you felt the DU was illegal when you were doing it? What sense does that make? Doesn't that undermine your whole story?

These are pretty straightforward and obvious questions most interviewers with a journalism background of any kind would have asked. I think most halfway interested people would have asked them. So it's striking that they didn't get asked.

Now, as far as mickey believing Rob did the DU bug, the easy way to clean that whole bit up would be for mickey to interview Rob on camera and ask the questions just listed above. Rob would have a non-adversarial interviewer, and I would pick up the tab for that interview, which would then be put on YouTube.
As weird as you are, you are somewhat on the right track here. But that's only because you are coming up this stuff 100% after the fact.

ANY questions would have been fine, because when you're talking about history and not making it up on the go, it's easy. I'll even answer your questions here.

1. Perhaps wizard didn't ask where the first place I discovered the bug because, unlike you, he read about that topic pre-interview on this forum. Yet, WTF does "where first?" matter anyway?

2. Again, how many times must I explain that the various odd allegations I made about the machines over the years were nothing more than attempts at "minds occupation" for my own reasons, while covering as many bases as I felt comfortable covering along the way. And NO ONE could understand this unless they possessed two things: had the classroom training I went through, and we're able to walk in my shoes 24/7 from 2004 to 2019.

3. This is a stupid question. People will believe what they want to believe, and when it comes to me on forums, by and large most want to believe what their hate leads them to believe, or how their jealousy over my extremely stable and successful personal life as well as my overall interjection of myself into the video poker/gambling world, guides them from there.

4. Once again, this has all been answered here prior to the interview. Obviously it was disappointing to have to stop. And even more obviously, how could I have POSSIBLY known my last time playing it was my last time playing it, when I played it!?

I didn't tell my family until I told you folks. I said that before. Not wanting to beleaguer the point, but I have extensive training in when, how, and why to keep my mouth shut, and if you tell anybody until you're safe doing so then you're too weak to even trust yourself. You people want to psycho_analyze this just as kew does with basically everything about me. Better if you treat yourselves to an intensive reading with comprehension program.

I said the DU play was illegal because of the way Kane and Nestor played it. Using a pre-existing winner that you didn't gamble to get is in my mind, illegal.

Finally, wizard wasn't interested in some sort of interrogation. If you can't figure out why he held the interview then you'll never understand any of this.