Legal Opinion Request for MrV --

[Rob.Singer]

I can't add much beyond what Rob.Singer posted. It speaks eloquently for itself. I just wish he hadn't let the mathematical cat out of the bag. Now casinos will only allow you to bet red.

I'm really disappointed in you Comrade. I was expecting much bigger things from a cool Lambo owner such as yourself. 6 posts lead by Kew, is now INSURMOUNTABLE...............Unless of course UNKOOL1 decides to stop posting after saying so over 3 dozen times...................NAH IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

I don't own a Lamborghini. I can just borrow that particular custom model, like Thomas Magnum. The owner used to have a Maserati, a Ferrari, and some others, but he's scaled back since retiring.

That particular car was used in a photo spread at the Playboy mansion, by the way.

Idiot. You can't even get the facts straight when you're being weird, and while, as usual, claiming to "know someone" who's Mr. Big.

Magnum drove a Ferrari.

[redietz]

I'm really disappointed in you Comrade. I was expecting much bigger things from a cool Lambo owner such as yourself. 6 posts lead by Kew, is now INSURMOUNTABLE...............Unless of course UNKOOL1 decides to stop posting after saying so over 3 dozen times...................NAH IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

I don't own a Lamborghini. I can just borrow that particular custom model, like Thomas Magnum. The owner used to have a Maserati, a Ferrari, and some others, but he's scaled back since retiring.

That particular car was used in a photo spread at the Playboy mansion, by the way.

Idiot. You can't even get the facts straight when you're being weird, and while, as usual, claiming to "know someone" who's Mr. Big.

Magnum drove a Ferrari.

Everybody knows Magnum usually, but not always, drove a Ferrari. Sometimes the Ferrari was "in the shop" due to Magnum's having driven it.

The point was that I was borrowing a car beyond my pay grade, like Thomas Magnum.

If you doubt anything I have to say regarding the Lamborghini, I could have the owner call you and verify my tall tales. Just let me know when would be a good time.

[MaxPen]

Kew, I'm feeling generous today and because we're on an extended stop I'll give you some free education that you seem to have missed out on.

You're always crying wolf over those of us that say we've been gambling winners playing in mostly or 100% -EV situations. You also pretend that if there's any beginners or vulnerable people out there reading this that it may hurt them because winning on negative games just isn't possible.

Here's where and why you're wrong. First, the bell curve exists for a reason. Your limited knowledge tells you "if it's positive you win and if it's negative you lose". But in advanced mathematics class you learn that is not true, because it isn't ALWAYS true. That "other side" of the curve does in fact get populated at times. Otherwise, it would not exist.

In a strictly mathematical world your above hypothesis is absolutely always true. But there is much more to this world we live in than a "strictly mathematical" environment. Follow this example and it will lead to your enlightenment, which in turn should put your very troubled mind at ease.

I'll provide an example from MY working world prior to my gambling career began. In the Aerospace industry, issues such as systems tolerances and material stress levels are precisely mathematically calculated in order to safely operate manufactured equipment at the highest performances known. But does every similar piece of equipment (ie, machines, tools, fighter jets, radios etc.) operate the same? You would think so and expect them to, right?

But that would be the wrong assumption. Why? Because as important as disciplines like software programming, developmental processes, and quality control are, every manufactured item or system is equally subject to the ramifications of Human Factors Engineering. And while a great majority of the time operational specs fall within the range of expectations, there infrequently are times that they don't, even as they are in the hands of seemingly similar experts.

Thus, you have what's called "deviation from the norm" ie, the "other side" of that bell curve. Sometimes the results are far better than expected/sometimes they are far worse. But this area of mathematics does exist. And it could not be better exemplified than in gambling.

You claim over and over again the very simple and safe statement that "+ means win and - means lose". Most people who gamble do fall within those parameters. But not all. Very few have been able to utilize something very unique to them via the mighty computer attached to their necks, called a human factor, that others may never begin to comprehend. So assuming no one's punking anyone--and I know I havent--then if a person says they win on negative games over time then it is entirely possible. Not likely, but possible. So your assertion that such claims "hurt" others is blatantly out of line.

You also have limited number of occurrences where you can remain outside the range of expected results.

You said more in that statement than kew did in his entire essay.

It would take a week to discuss all the variables in how and when those variables could occur, of course mainly based on any specific example. But you're right--occurrences would in fact be limited. But a person can somewhat control that by choice.

In my play strategy for a quick example, I'm not flipping a coin with a 50-50 opportunity or looking for red or black to appear with just under a 50% opportunity. My choice was to play a strategy that has an 80%-85% chance of winning every single session played--if played correctly. That in and of itself expands the number of positive outcomes. You also have to know how to walk. That's one of the more important human inputs in playing casino games.

I may need to buy your books for the comedic value alone...lol

Does the roulette wheel resonate a certain pitch to tell you the color to choose? How does the baccarat shoe telepath the next hand outcome to the player?

Maybe you need to write another book.

[accountinquestion]

I forgot I bought a book of Rob Singers.. lol maybe I'll crack it open tonight.

I love it when he gets all windbaggy and puts on his writer's hat. lmao

For some reason Kewlj is my favorite .. what HEART

[mickeycrimm]

KewlJ, while Rob.Singer's post #124 superficially appears to be an appeal to his purported results being possibly explained by "the far end of the bell curve," that's not really what a careful read suggests.

The key line is, "Very few have been able to utilize something very unique to them via the mighty computer attached to their necks, called a human factor, that others may never be able to comprehend."

That line is clearly implying that by somehow using human thought processes, those thought processes have some direct impact on results. Otherwise, what does the line mean? And why include the line? So somehow "the human factor," which is not at all defined, is supposed to DO something.

This kind of writing is both common and classic when one investigates the paranormal. The entirety of post #124 can be read as an argument that people can wind up at the far end of a bell curve. I mean, no kidding, people win lotteries, for example. Who doesn't know that? However, the paranormal claimants seem to always slip in a couple of public lines that imply something quite different, that there is some "human factor" that transcends mathematics somehow. Usually that "human factor" mention is an appeal to some kind of wish-fulfillment that there is more to it than math.

On one hand, post #124 argues for recognition of bell curves, but then slips in the line suggesting a transcendent mental ability. Also implied, but not clearly stated, is whether the author of post #124 himself thinks that he has such abilities.

So the proper response is to ask the author of post #124 if he believes he can, in advance of events, place himself at the far end of a bell curve through his "human factor." Simply ask him if he can do that.

If he answers "yes," then ask if he's willing to be tested. I notice that an author at The Skeptic has started his own fund for people who think they can do such things via their "human factor." I think the prize is $250,000. I will look up the author and post his contact info here later today.

An analogy would be a person that dies with about 60K in unpaid bills but had a million dollars in assets. A marxist propagandist can say about this person "he died in debt." The marxist propagandist thinks that people are to stupid to figure out that just because a person had some outstanding bills upon his/her death, in reality the person had a net worth well above the outstanding debts. It's an attempt by the marxist propagandist to groom people to be marxists and live forever in utopia. Don't you agree, comrade?

[Ozzy]

I'd pay a big finsky for any of Rockin Rob's books.

[Rob.Singer]

I don't own a Lamborghini. I can just borrow that particular custom model, like Thomas Magnum. The owner used to have a Maserati, a Ferrari, and some others, but he's scaled back since retiring.

That particular car was used in a photo spread at the Playboy mansion, by the way.

Idiot. You can't even get the facts straight when you're being weird, and while, as usual, claiming to "know someone" who's Mr. Big.

Magnum drove a Ferrari.

Everybody knows Magnum usually, but not always, drove a Ferrari. Sometimes the Ferrari was "in the shop" due to Magnum's having driven it.

The point was that I was borrowing a car beyond my pay grade, like Thomas Magnum.

If you doubt anything I have to say regarding the Lamborghini, I could have the owner call you and verify my tall tales. Just let me know when would be a good time.

I think I'll go for a walk instead.

[Rob.Singer]

You also have limited number of occurrences where you can remain outside the range of expected results.

You said more in that statement than kew did in his entire essay.

It would take a week to discuss all the variables in how and when those variables could occur, of course mainly based on any specific example. But you're right--occurrences would in fact be limited. But a person can somewhat control that by choice.

In my play strategy for a quick example, I'm not flipping a coin with a 50-50 opportunity or looking for red or black to appear with just under a 50% opportunity. My choice was to play a strategy that has an 80%-85% chance of winning every single session played--if played correctly. That in and of itself expands the number of positive outcomes. You also have to know how to walk. That's one of the more important human inputs in playing casino games.

I may need to buy your books for the comedic value alone...lol

Does the roulette wheel resonate a certain pitch to tell you the color to choose? How does the baccarat shoe telepath the next hand outcome to the player?

Maybe you need to write another book.

Some minds with trouble understanding would only think of it like that.

This particular point is that in roulette, the player has the ability to make a choice: red, black or green. I don't know how baccarat is played.

I strongly suspected, but now I can see why some of you have never been able to hold down a real job.

[Cerveza Fria]

So, after reading this forum, it appears that my initial notion of what this place was about was entirely incorrect. Initially, I thought this forum was about APs reacting insight about games, strategies etc. Now, i fully comprehend what this place is. A bunch of 12 year old minded gringos that promote bullshit gaming strategies and threaten to dox each other.

Dude, save your cash. I retired from active litigation a long time ago. But, I can tell you this, the only person who wins in a case like this is your attorney. You're better off keeping the 20k you have allowed for this and buying a crash dummy. Put a picture of Rob's face on it and kick the shit out of it every day. You'll get more satisfaction, stay out of legal trouble and not squander the cash.

[accountinquestion]

So, after reading this forum, it appears that my initial notion of what this place was about was entirely incorrect. Initially, I thought this forum was about APs reacting insight about games, strategies etc. Now, i fully comprehend what this place is. A bunch of 12 year old minded gringos that promote bullshit gaming strategies and threaten to dox each other.

Dude, save your cash. I retired from active litigation a long time ago. But, I can tell you this, the only person who wins in a case like this is your attorney. You're better off keeping the 20k you have allowed for this and buying a crash dummy. Put a picture of Rob's face on it and kick the shit out of it every day. You'll get more satisfaction, stay out of legal trouble and not squander the cash.

Dumbass we're far closer emotionally to 15-17 year olds.

[accountinquestion]

Many many years ago, I was sorta like Kewl. Never gave in, never gave up. Some people do respect that. I know I do.

Kewl, you are basically fighting for the dignity of this site.

Did anyone see the speech of Zelinsky?



As I was listening to this, I couldn't help but think how Kewl is basically THE resistance on VCT.

This world is shit. Kewl stands up against it.

RIP

[tableplay]

Now, i fully comprehend what this place is. A bunch of 12 year old minded gringos that promote bullshit gaming strategies and threaten to dox each other.

Actually there are some very valuable strategies on this site IMHO. I recommend Monet's "Hot Sucker" thread and Mickeycrimm's posts regarding Montana progressive Keno,Buffalo Diamond slot,Cashman Slot,Regal Riches slot, must hit slot strategies, etc. and general advanced forum searches using Mickeycrimm as the poster and the word "slot". Anyway feel free not to follow these recommendations obviously.

[MisterV]

Now, i fully comprehend what this place is. A bunch of 12 year old minded gringos that promote bullshit gaming strategies and threaten to dox each other.

Few here promote such strategies, and few threaten to dox others.

"The silent majority" who post and lurk here do not have that agenda; instead they simply smile, scratch their balls and mutter "What a good boy am I."

[jbjb]

Just play the bag game with peacocks.

Disclaimer. Those full bags are no different than full rice bowls and do not indicate a bonus is near.

[redietz]

So, after reading this forum, it appears that my initial notion of what this place was about was entirely incorrect. Initially, I thought this forum was about APs reacting insight about games, strategies etc. Now, i fully comprehend what this place is. A bunch of 12 year old minded gringos that promote bullshit gaming strategies and threaten to dox each other.

Dude, save your cash. I retired from active litigation a long time ago. But, I can tell you this, the only person who wins in a case like this is your attorney. You're better off keeping the 20k you have allowed for this and buying a crash dummy. Put a picture of Rob's face on it and kick the shit out of it every day. You'll get more satisfaction, stay out of legal trouble and not squander the cash.

I'm 64 years old. The cash is irrelevant. I have a 45-year reputation that what I say in public regarding my business is factual. I don't care about making one cent. What I want is for the people who declare this or that about me to have to sign an affidavit or swear in court that what they declared is true.

As far as helpful gambling advice, yeah, occasionally I have provided that:


https://www.gamblingforums.com/threa...ervices.23785/


That's it. I will do this as instructed.

[mcap]

Many many years ago, I was sorta like Kewl. Never gave in, never gave up. Some people do respect that. I know I do.

Kewl, you are basically fighting for the dignity of this site.

Did anyone see the speech of Zelinsky?



As I was listening to this, I couldn't help but think how Kewl is basically THE resistance on VCT.

This world is shit. Kewl stands up against it.

RIP

He is? You actually read enough of his posts to figure that out?

I always thought kew would have to chop each post in half four times before expecting anyone but redeitz to read it. I’m pretty sure Rob just assumes it’s the same thing as always and responds as he would rather than read the marathon posts.

[smurgerburger]

So, after reading this forum, it appears that my initial notion of what this place was about was entirely incorrect. Initially, I thought this forum was about APs reacting insight about games, strategies etc. Now, i fully comprehend what this place is. A bunch of 12 year old minded gringos that promote bullshit gaming strategies and threaten to dox each other.

Dude, save your cash. I retired from active litigation a long time ago. But, I can tell you this, the only person who wins in a case like this is your attorney. You're better off keeping the 20k you have allowed for this and buying a crash dummy. Put a picture of Rob's face on it and kick the shit out of it every day. You'll get more satisfaction, stay out of legal trouble and not squander the cash.

I'm 64 years old. The cash is irrelevant. I have a 45-year reputation that what I say in public regarding my business is factual. I don't care about making one cent. What I want is for the people who declare this or that about me to have to sign an affidavit or swear in court that what they declared is true.

As far as helpful gambling advice, yeah, occasionally I have provided that:


https://www.gamblingforums.com/threa...ervices.23785/


That's it. I will do this as instructed.

But the thing is...who fucking cares what gets said on this forum?

[MisterV]

You want an analysis, OK, fine.

KJ wears white, his detractors wear black.

He's sort of like the Coen brothers' Buster Scruggs on these gambling boards.

[accountinquestion]

Many many years ago, I was sorta like Kewl. Never gave in, never gave up. Some people do respect that. I know I do.

Kewl, you are basically fighting for the dignity of this site.

Did anyone see the speech of Zelinsky?



As I was listening to this, I couldn't help but think how Kewl is basically THE resistance on VCT.

This world is shit. Kewl stands up against it.

RIP

He is? You actually read enough of his posts to figure that out?

I always thought kew would have to chop each post in half four times before expecting anyone but redeitz to read it. I’m pretty sure Rob just assumes it’s the same thing as always and responds as he would rather than read the marathon posts.

If you look at VCT - what it was and what is has become and you overlay that with the history of the Soviet empire then yea, I feel it is a pretty apt analogy. When I watched that video the first time ,I couldn't help but think of the bravery put forth by Kewl against all odds. Here he still is, avenging truth and against any and all disinformation on gambling.

[kewlJ]

The name of this forum is Vegas Casino Talk. That would be talk about Las Vegas casinos and a little more broadly all casino play. There is another forum called Gambling Forums. Should be self-explanatory. And the biggest of the three and at one time most serious Wizard of Vegas. This one takes a little explanation. This is a forum begun by a man regarded as one of the gambling math experts. His stated mission was "to help players be better gamblers by understanding the math so they can make better bets".

Gambling is mathematics! 100% pure and simple. Is it too much to ask and expect these forums with theses names they have to be based in mathematics and not long disproven voodoo gambling concepts, like progression wagering, stop limits, special (less optimal plays) hot and cold machines, machines "telepathing information". And the very latest, Singer thinking a player can beat roulette by switching back and forth between colors or odd even or any other of the so called 50/50 bets that hit 47% of the time <- .

Is it really too much to expect that when someone comes along to one of these forums claiming all kinds of (long-term) winning, that they have something mathematically accepted to back that up, and not long disproven voodoo theories that defy math? Is that really too much to ask?


We don't get many new members here. At least not many that participate and stick around. I wonder why? How many times has some person new to gambling, or maybe not new to gambling, but having decided to learn more about gambling and the math to give themselves a better chance of winning, so their google search leads them here or Gambling Forums and the first thing they read is some guy saying how the machines are talking to him, teleporting information, or yesterday that he can beat roulette because he gets to choose the color he wants to bet. Give me a break!

Or maybe that person finds Wizard of Vegas, and reading up on Michael Shackleford, says yeah this is good. This forum was started by and is run by one of the most respected gambling math guys in Vegas. So let's see what we have. Top Thread: The adventures of Mdawg", with no explanation of how he defies the odds and the math and wins almost everyday other that he bets into streaks. He can just "feel" when it is time to bet more.

These things and these people should be called out! And if they continue to make these ridiculous claims on a daily basis, they should be called out on a daily basis!