Oof.Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Just in case, who inherits this forum in your will?
Oof.Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Just in case, who inherits this forum in your will?
The damn dirty stinking Paiute Tribe... that's who.Originally Posted by mcap
Monet, I do appreciate the Planet of the Apes reference.
Todd -- if you've been prescribed Paxlovid as treatment, bear in mind that a small percent of the time it just masks symptoms and reduces measured viral load, but you're not actually done with the virus. During the treatment, the virus is just reduced to lurking, but is still there and can re-bloom a few days after the treatment stops, in which case you'll test positive again after four or five days post-stop.
Just a heads up in case that was the treatment.
Was the victim related to Jamal Khashoggi???Originally Posted by monet
Keep your friends close, keep your drinks closer...
So Rob really used a Vegas area VPN? Surprise Surprise!
I can't wait for Druff to post his findings of Singers location the day he claimed to be in Vegas meeting MaxPen.
However, I think we already know.
It's funny, I don't use a VPN, at least not intentionally. I was told on another forum that my internet provider, has one built in and shows me posting from all different areas that I am not. I don't really know how that works as I really am not very technically inclined. That is why earlier I said Rob's location for that day he was supposed to be in Vegas would come up Kansas, or New Mexico or somewhere. I didn't realize people can pick the location they want it to look like they are posting from. How lame.Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Funny thing is Druff is not even up to the point that you (PV) joined the forum and revealed exactly where that picture came from. Druff is still a couple weeks behind, not quite sure where it came from, but knowing it was not a legitimate picture of a legitimate hit by Singer. I was at the point too, before you came along and laid it all out.So I am just waiting for Druff to catch up, not that it will matter, if Singer returns he will call Druff names like he did in the past and if he doesn't return, his proxy mickey will just blow it off as being a big joke by Singer.
At any rate, Singer clearly had proposed a wager that MaxPen accepted (8 times), and Singer did not show at the place and time he set, meaning he reneged. That isn't supposed to be acceptable on any forum. Singer also incorporated Las Vegas renowned Gambling attorney Bob Nersesian, in his lie about placing escrow. For those offenses, hopefully Druff will put this guy (and us) out of his misery.
Dan Druff: "there's no question that MDawg has been an obnoxious braggart, and has rubbed a ton of people the wrong way. There's something missing from his stories. Either they're fabricated, grossly exaggerated, or largely incomplete".
If anyone is arguing that Rob.Singer did this stuff as an alleged prank, the problem is that he goes on narcissistic, "feel the pain" rants, where he goes after people personally in vicious public ways. So it's not much of a prank. It's an excuse of some kind to attack and denigrate people who point out the absurd garbage he's posting. That's most of what it is. It's also a way to get hangers-on to join him in attacking others in a personal way.
I call it psychotic performance art. He knows his set-up is just like Cracked's "We ReMade The Batman for $20." It's cheap and obviously fake and silly, but it provides him the opportunity to say vile things as a way to defend himself. It gives others a chance to flex their absurdist arguments so they can do the same. Mickey winds up saying "I have no reason to disbelieve Rob.Singer." Coach belly tries to find some Socratic flaw in the evidence that Singer didn't win any jackpot, while badmouthing the people who have calmly and seriously tried to explain the problems inherent in the Rob.Singer posts. Alan withholds judgement because he has an "open mind."
Why Todd allows this kind of stuff is beyond me.
Sadism coupled with aggressive narcissism, that's my vote.
Having retired from government service and no longer being a contract killer Rob searches the web for new targets; he's just got to scratch that itch.
I always pictured him in an Aston Martin, not a Newell.
What, Me Worry?
I think the reason that Rob was willing to blatantly lie regarding placing $700k with Bob Nersesian, is he knew if a random person called Nersesian, he couldnt confirm or deny such a claim due to legal consequences. Then if KJ called Nersesian, since they may have had prior business dealings/friendship, Nersesian would verify Singer never sent any money.
Singer would instantly claim KJ was a liar and demand "proof", which of course Nersesian would not provide because if he had in fact received money from singer (which he didn't) he would face legal consequences by disclosing dealings with other clients.
It's amazing the lengths Singer attempts to go to in order to try to get us to believe something he clearly isn't.
Would someone mind telling me the origins of this forum?
Did Alan start this forum?
Later sell to Druff?
He has been doing this for decades. Amazing? Not the word I would use. Sad, pathetic, sick are words that immediately come to mind.Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
I believe you are mistaken about consequences for the attorney. If asked if he has received a 6 figure escrow regarding a wager on a gambling forum, saying "no" does not violate anything. There is no client or confidentiality to break because he hadn't received that escrow. Now had he received such an escrow, I don't know that he would have confirmed. At that point he might have said, I can't discuss it or can't confirm or deny. But having not received anything, there is no client, nor confidentiality to break.
Dan Druff: "there's no question that MDawg has been an obnoxious braggart, and has rubbed a ton of people the wrong way. There's something missing from his stories. Either they're fabricated, grossly exaggerated, or largely incomplete".
Yes. Alan starting, owning and running this forum was before my time, but yes.Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Dan Druff: "there's no question that MDawg has been an obnoxious braggart, and has rubbed a ton of people the wrong way. There's something missing from his stories. Either they're fabricated, grossly exaggerated, or largely incomplete".
The member list shows Alan as "founder" of the forum; his first post here was 8-24-10.
Several years ago he left in a huff but he gave the forum to the current owner, Todd Witteles, aka" Dan Druff."
What, Me Worry?
Cliff Notes:Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Quick summary from my perspective. I joined when Alan ran the forum as Best Buys. The Las Vegas section was about the experiences that Alan and others had in terms of types of play and comps and what you had to do to get what ratings where. People would talk about restaurant experiences and slot club experiences, that kind of thing. I found it useful, as sports betting comps had dried up from really useful discretionary comps and a buck for every $100 to $200 wagered down to no discretionary comps and a buck for every $400 to $600 wagered. So I got to check out other comp options and comp rates and all that, and what Alan had to do to get what. The forum was useful and relatively respectful.
Rob, who had a weekly Gaming Today column where he was quite often featured on the front page, was reasonably respected as knowing Las Vegas pretty well, even if he didn't quite have an optimal handle on how to play video poker. In fact, an issue of GT quite often featured Rob opining on his various systems while another columnist would discuss optimal video poker advantage play in the same issue.
Alan did some videos that can be found on YouTube where he interviewed Singer explaining his systems. A poster named Arci went head to head here versus Singer's systems claims. At one point, Rob was supposed to send his taxes to Alan to prove his claims of winning, and Arci was also. Arci, who played modest amounts part time, sent his taxes, which verified his winning claims. Rob reneged.
Personally, I went 2500 posts without mentioning that I was a sports handicapper until one day Rob decided to wax eloquent about how to bet sports and was so wrong, I felt I should pull rank and speak up.
Eventually, Alan sold the forum to Todd (Dan). Rob, Alan, and I pre-date all of the others here. We're the three guys who used our real names (everyone knows Rob Singer is Rob Argentino, as he stated it in his GT column more than once), and we're three of the oldest posters.
Yeah, your probably correct. It's probably not illegal to say "no". Probably more "best practices" to say we don't discuss other clients, but yeah, a simple "no" would probably be ok legally.Originally Posted by kewlJHe has been doing this for decades. Amazing? Not the word I would use. Sad, pathetic, sick are words that immediately come to mind.Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
I believe you are mistaken about consequences for the attorney. If asked if he has received a 6 figure escrow regarding a wager on a gambling forum, saying "no" does not violate anything. There is no client or confidentiality to break because he hadn't received that escrow. Now had he received such an escrow, I don't know that he would have confirmed. At that point he might have said, I can't discuss it or can't confirm or deny. But having not received anything, there is no client, nor confidentiality to break.
MrV, legal opinion?
Interesting, Thank you!Originally Posted by redietzCliff Notes:Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Quick summary from my perspective. I joined when Alan ran the forum as Best Buys. The Las Vegas section was about the experiences that Alan and others had in terms of types of play and comps and what you had to do to get what ratings where. People would talk about restaurant experiences and slot club experiences, that kind of thing. I found it useful, as sports betting comps had dried up from really useful discretionary comps and a buck for every $100 to $200 wagered down to no discretionary comps and a buck for every $400 to $600 wagered. So I got to check out other comp options and comp rates and all that, and what Alan had to do to get what. The forum was useful and relatively respectful.
Rob, who had a weekly Gaming Today column where he was quite often featured on the front page, was reasonably respected as knowing Las Vegas pretty well, even if he didn't quite have an optimal handle on how to play video poker. In fact, an issue of GT quite often featured Rob opining on his various systems while another columnist would discuss optimal video poker advantage play in the same issue.
Alan did some videos that can be found on YouTube where he interviewed Singer explaining his systems. A poster named Arci went head to head here versus Singer's systems claims. At one point, Rob was supposed to send his taxes to Alan to prove his claims of winning, and Arci was also. Arci, who played modest amounts part time, sent his taxes, which verified his winning claims. Rob reneged.
Personally, I went 2500 posts without mentioning that I was a sports handicapper until one day Rob decided to wax eloquent about how to bet sports and was so wrong, I felt I should pull rank and speak up.
Eventually, Alan sold the forum to Todd (Dan). Rob, Alan, and I pre-date all of the others here. We're the three guys who used our real names (everyone knows Rob Singer is Rob Argentino, as he stated it in his GT column more than once), and we're three of the oldest posters.
Ps: I did see the Alan/Singer interview. The math defying stuff as well lol
Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
If in fact Rob never contacted the atty then there is no impediment to the atty saying "NO" as there is no atty / client relationship.
If however Rob escrowed the money I see no reason why Rob would not want MaxPen to know this, as Max was supposed to escrow money as well.
So yeah, if he escrowed it and Max inquired if it had been escrowed then the atty should acknowledge the fact, UNLESS for some insane reason Rob told the atty not to tell anyone.
Not clear as to inquiries by uninvolved third parties; caution would dictate a "no comment" but only if Rob escrowed the funds; otherwise the atty should be free to say "No, I never heard of this guy before."
What, Me Worry?
Here is the undeniable truth about Rob Singer: (play on his book title for those not familiar)
Fueled by jealous of Bob Dancer, Singer attempted to become a video poker AP in the 1990's and failed. In a 4 year span doing the things that every other VP AP do and make money at, Singer lost several hundred thousand dollars. THIS was the only thing he has ever been honest about.
Now let's just examine this for a moment. It is pretty damn hard to fail as a VP AP, unless you are a complete moron or degenerate gambler. Even I who am not the smartest guy, have enjoyed almost a decade of success playing VP the "mailer game". And when Singer tried the mailers were even better.For that angle, the mailer game, all that is necessary is the discipline to play only the coin in needed to generate the mailer offers that make the whole play positive EV. The only way a player can fail is if he is a degenerate gambler that can't adhere to that discipline needed, and just continues to gamble away all the profits and all. Singer failed because he IS a degenerate gambler.
From that point on, unable to be the AP that he had dreamed of, it was one claim after another, all defying math. Every claim was an alternative universe of claims that couldn't be by the math. And anyone who challenged those claims based on the math, was attacked and belittled, because that is the only way he could answer.
One after another, all debunked, until he finally stole "the double up bug claim" that had been in the news a few years earlier. This one couldn't be debunked because of the math. But it was pretty evident to almost everyone that he stole this claim and did not play it or make any real money.
Each time that there is almost no one left that believed his claims he would escalate with a new bigger claim and the process of challenging and attacks and name calling would repeat. And each time when finally debunked and the truth came out, he looked more and more pathetic, until present day.
Dan Druff: "there's no question that MDawg has been an obnoxious braggart, and has rubbed a ton of people the wrong way. There's something missing from his stories. Either they're fabricated, grossly exaggerated, or largely incomplete".
Weird how his seeming antipathy toward Dancer induced Rob Argentino to adopt a similar last name for gambling forum use: "Singer" as compared to "Dancer."
Not sure what his point was though.
Rob said in 2009 that he had no problem with people knowing his real name: see
https://forum.vpfree2.com/t/the-frau...rgentino/66785
Gosh, I wonder whatever happened to the "new cash-bought Corvette ZR1/ZR3?"
LOL
What, Me Worry?
I agree with this point of interpretation. Rob has been falsely representing himself as a successful gambler his whole public life. These aren't pranks.Originally Posted by redietz
As KewlJ pointed out in another post about this, it's noteworthy that Rob actually named himself after Bob Dancer. Sure it's a joke but it's also kind of intriguing, because he has essentially modeled himself after Dancer, the Las Vegas public video poker pro. He's like Bob Dancer's shadow. The fantasy of success rather than the reality.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote