vpFREE2 Forums

Cogno'd Humiliation.....

> > > More of "I'm just"?? How about "just trying to set the record
> > > straight" whenever I give you a good slap you can't recover
> from???
> >
> > Hmmm. I seemed to have recovered just fine and lovin' every
minute
> of it. Seeing you squirm each and every time you reply is a
wonderful
> > thing.
>
> Now you admit you get a good slap now and then.

By the machines. Absolutely. We all do now and them.

That's too corny for the real world.

> Then you say
> you've 'recovered just fine'. HAHA! I don't think so. The first
thing
> you need to do is learn how to stay out of the casinos every day.

I don't go to casinos every day. Try again moron.

Yes you do--another pile of feel-good BS. Missing one every 11 days
doesn't count. You're an addict either way, and a foolish one at that.

> then try eliminating gambling from every waking day and from

every

> plan in your life.

Like most advantage gamblers, I plan my gambling. I also plan my
other activities, like golf. Only a completely moron would live

their life without a plan. From statements like this one I guess you
fit the bill.

The only thing you've been planning for the last 10 years was when to
go to a casino, how to get there, and a move to LV. And you wonder
why you're a problem gambler?

That's the wonderful thing about the truth. I can bring it up time
and time again and it doesn't get old. You, on the other hand,

start squirming every time the truth appears.

Yup, i'm squirming so much I even wrote about it and am answering my
44th e-mail about why Congo fears me. Yup--it's quite a SQUIRM!!!

> First, show us where I state my strategy is played only on

negative machines.

Answer this question.

You're avoiding the question, and I won't even read the rest of this
until you answer it. Why are you afraid to? Let me guess....

Have you ever said the payback of the machines

does NOT matter? If the answer is YES, then I don't need to say
anything more. If the answer is NO, then I will show several

examples

of where you have said EXACTLY this and proved once again you are a
liar.

> I'll give you the $350k if you can find it anywhere let's
> say...4 times---let alone "hundreds of times".

Of course, you don't use those exact words. You say the EV doesn't
matter or you WOULD win on negative machines, etc. The meaning is

the

same. As I said before, the ONLY debate here is your claim that the
EV doesn't matter. It sure sounds like you're backing down from

this

claim.

> Then to show you're
> not terrified of me and that I'm not dealing with a sissified

geek,

> you give me the cash if you don't find it! Here's a hint: Look at
the
> strategy on my site first before you stick that foot in your

mouth

> yet again. Pretty good odds, Mr. statistical nerd, right? Out
> of "hundreds of times, just show me FOUR! Let's have it logic
freak!
> Do what your type of moron has always done. Get the FACTS!!! I
> promise not to laugh in your face or pull your pants down in

front

of
> the girls. Somebody STOP ME!!!!!!!

How can we, it would be child abuse.

> > >
> > > Where do you see I play "only negative games"?
> >
> > You've claimed many times that it doesn't matter whether the
> machines are positive or negative. If you now want to change that
> claim then I will have proved my point.
>
> Let me clear the obvious confusion from your thick head. In order
for
> you to comprehend how I play, you first must acknowledge that my
> strategy says first to play the best pay tables available where

one

> sits to play.

This contradicts everything you've said about EV. It either matters
or it doesn't. Sounds like you're now saying it makes a BIG
difference.

> If that includes pos. games then that's what's played.
> You, as a self-proclaimed 'expert' should accept that there are

few

> positive games available above dollars. But there are some. I've
> stated over and over that MOST of my play is on negative games,

and

> that I've won and continue to win regardless--because of my
strategy
> and the games I play--some of which are positive at the lower

end.

We would all expect you win using positive games. Sounds like you

are

now saying the same thing as the gurus you love to denigrate.

> I
> can easily win on any game below 100%, but your pal Congo for

some

> odd reason REQUIRED that I play ONLY <99.3% for 50 sessions, and
> that's not how I play.

Talking out of both sides of your mouth once again? Either you can
win or you can't and you admit it. You can't claim "I can easily

win"

and then come back with "that's not how I play". This is called
squirming and you do it all the time.

> Why spend all that time criticizing my
> strategy, criticizing my win record, and saying I'm lying about

my

> overall results AND THEN not require me to play the system that

you

> dufuses criticize?

BS. You can play your system. Either stop saying the payback

doesn't

matter or accept the bet.

> At the end of the day that proves nothing either
> way. Don't you realize all you're doing is looking like you're
afraid
> I just might be telling the truth by putting in your special
> stipulation/escape clause that you know I'd never accept since

I've

> never once played that way? That's the leading comment I've been
> getting from GT readers over the past week, and they're

absolutely

> right. You guys fear that which you do not understand, so you

have

to
> change it in order to be at a certain comfort level.

The squirm master at work. You see, we all know the payback DOES
matter and until you either admit it or accept the bet then all you
are doing is squirming.

> >
> Do you still claim that it doesn't
> > matter whether a machine is positive or negative?
>
> In any one session, it does not matter if the game is 98% or 102%.

Yes it does.

> You can win just as easily as you can lose. Happens all the time
> every day to millions of players.

Almost true ... except for your use of the term "easily". The

higher

the payback the less likely you will lose on any given game in any
given SINGLE session.

> The problem arises when people have
> no win goals, and after they hit they think they can keep on
hitting
> winners, and they give it all back and more. That's the curse of

so-

> called 'advantage players'.

Every hand is independent. Win goals make absolutely no difference

in

your lifetime results. What may make a difference is playing poorly
when getting tired. If win goals help you avoid that then they work
for you. They may not be required for others. Setting time limits

is

another way of accomplishing the same thing.

> They have no comprehension of when to
> quit or why, and part of that disease is controlled by their

sacred

> points accumulation. Being ahead $1000 on a 25c game means

nothing.

It means you're ahead $1000.

> Even if they go home $200 behind after being that far ahead, they
> talk themselves into being 'happy' about such a fiasco because
> they 'earned' $17/hour in phantom bucks for their 11 hours of
effort.
> It's almost beyond belief how you people twist the logic.

And if they go home ahead $2200? What does that mean? It has

exactly

the same meaning. Zilch. Their future expectation will not have
changed no matter what they do. Your attempt to infer that

advantage

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

players always lose is just another one of your lies.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > You're favorite--DENIAL. Did you ever wonder how foolish you

sound

when you deny everything---even to yourself. I know you have very
little respect for yourself, but even YOU have got to be able to
> see that one!
>
> You're always wrong. Was that French benefits?

Looks like you've never been to France either. Big surprise!

LMAO. You have no idea what I'm referring to.

>
> Could you be avoiding the question? First, let me answer your
> assertion. My wife and I are getting along great. Gambling when

and

> where we want ... living what some would consider to be a

fantastic

> lifestyle. Now, tell us about that bankruptcy.

Looks to me like you're the one that's lying here. How about it?

Ever

beat your wife? No lying again--I have proof. Now answer or else!

More lies. You have no clue. Now, tell us about that bankruptcy. You
sure are avoiding the subject.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

>
> > Then you say
> > you've 'recovered just fine'. HAHA! I don't think so. The first
> thing
> > you need to do is learn how to stay out of the casinos every

day.

>
> I don't go to casinos every day. Try again moron.

Yes you do--another pile of feel-good BS. Missing one every 11 days
doesn't count. You're an addict either way, and a foolish one at

that.

Let's see ... for the last 6 months I have been in casinos less than
1/2 those days. I guess those must not count either. Wait, you're
using the Rob Singer counting method ... 1+1 = 3. The same math you
use when playing VP.

>
> > then try eliminating gambling from every waking day and from
every
> > plan in your life.
>
> Like most advantage gamblers, I plan my gambling. I also plan my
> other activities, like golf. Only a completely moron would live
their life without a plan. From statements like this one I guess

you

fit the bill.

The only thing you've been planning for the last 10 years was when

to

go to a casino, how to get there, and a move to LV. And you wonder
why you're a problem gambler?

Nope. Gambling is just a hobby. Don't try to pass off YOUR problems
on me. Clearly, you are much more of an addicted gambler than I'll
ever be. You can't even write a couple of sentences without bringing
it up. Now I know why you keep using the word "denial", it's part of
your legacy.

>
> That's the wonderful thing about the truth. I can bring it up

time

> and time again and it doesn't get old. You, on the other hand,
start squirming every time the truth appears.

Yup, i'm squirming so much I even wrote about it and am answering

my

44th e-mail about why Congo fears me. Yup--it's quite a SQUIRM!!!

So little time ... so many lies. Keep up the squirming.

>
> > First, show us where I state my strategy is played only on
negative machines.
>
> Answer this question.

You're avoiding the question, and I won't even read the rest of

this

until you answer it. Why are you afraid to? Let me guess....

You've implied several times that EV is not important. Here's one to
get you going.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2502

where you stated "you know I'll win regardless of the pay tables"

This pretty clearly states that you believe the pay tables don't
matter and you'll play YOUR STRATEGY on negative games.

In any event, the machines' payback has nothing to do with strategy.
Are you completely fogheaded and don't understand simple English? Or,
as usual, is this just your way of avoiding the truth? The question
at hand is "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK IMPORTANT?" Your silence below is
more than enough evidence to find you guilty of lieing.

Have you ever said the payback of the machines
> does NOT matter? If the answer is YES, then I don't need to say
> anything more. If the answer is NO, then I will show several
examples
> of where you have said EXACTLY this and proved once again you are

a

> liar.

Hmmmm. No answer ... We all know the reason for this.

>
> > I'll give you the $350k if you can find it anywhere let's
> > say...4 times---let alone "hundreds of times".
>
> Of course, you don't use those exact words. You say the EV

doesn't

> matter or you WOULD win on negative machines, etc. The meaning is
the
> same. As I said before, the ONLY debate here is your claim that

the

> EV doesn't matter. It sure sounds like you're backing down from
this
> claim.

Hmmmmm. Still no answer. I guess this is the admitance that you have
been caught and have no response.

> > > >
> > > > Where do you see I play "only negative games"?
> > >
> > > You've claimed many times that it doesn't matter whether the
> > machines are positive or negative. If you now want to change

that

> > claim then I will have proved my point.
> >
> > Let me clear the obvious confusion from your thick head. In

order

> for
> > you to comprehend how I play, you first must acknowledge that

my

> > strategy says first to play the best pay tables available where
one
> > sits to play.
>
> This contradicts everything you've said about EV. It either

matters

> or it doesn't. Sounds like you're now saying it makes a BIG
> difference.

Still no response. So, you're finally admitting that payback does
matter.

> > I
> > can easily win on any game below 100%, but your pal Congo for
some
> > odd reason REQUIRED that I play ONLY <99.3% for 50 sessions,

and

> > that's not how I play.
>
> Talking out of both sides of your mouth once again? Either you

can

> win or you can't and you admit it. You can't claim "I can easily
win"
> and then come back with "that's not how I play". This is called
> squirming and you do it all the time.

It's become clear why you avoided answering all these questions. You
have no response. You have either been lieing all this time or have
been playing positive machines just like all the APers. I love it.

>
> > At the end of the day that proves nothing either
> > way. Don't you realize all you're doing is looking like you're
> afraid
> > I just might be telling the truth by putting in your special
> > stipulation/escape clause that you know I'd never accept since
I've
> > never once played that way? That's the leading comment I've

been

> > getting from GT readers over the past week, and they're
absolutely
> > right. You guys fear that which you do not understand, so you
have
> to
> > change it in order to be at a certain comfort level.
>
> The squirm master at work. You see, we all know the payback DOES
> matter and until you either admit it or accept the bet then all

you

> are doing is squirming.

Silence is wonderful. The squirm-master can only sit there and
wriggle in his chair as the truth unfolds.

>
> > >
> > Do you still claim that it doesn't
> > > matter whether a machine is positive or negative?
> >
> > In any one session, it does not matter if the game is 98% or

102%.

>
> Yes it does.

And it always will. Kind of hard to face the truth, isn't it?

>
> > You can win just as easily as you can lose. Happens all the

time

> > every day to millions of players.
>
> Almost true ... except for your use of the term "easily". The
higher
> the payback the less likely you will lose on any given game in

any

> given SINGLE session.
>
> > The problem arises when people have
> > no win goals, and after they hit they think they can keep on
> hitting
> > winners, and they give it all back and more. That's the curse

of

so-
> > called 'advantage players'.
>
> Every hand is independent. Win goals make absolutely no

difference

in
> your lifetime results. What may make a difference is playing

poorly

> when getting tired. If win goals help you avoid that then they

work

> for you. They may not be required for others. Setting time limits
is
> another way of accomplishing the same thing.
>
> > They have no comprehension of when to
> > quit or why, and part of that disease is controlled by their
sacred
> > points accumulation. Being ahead $1000 on a 25c game means
nothing.
>
> It means you're ahead $1000.
>
> > Even if they go home $200 behind after being that far ahead,

they

> > talk themselves into being 'happy' about such a fiasco because
> > they 'earned' $17/hour in phantom bucks for their 11 hours of
> effort.
> > It's almost beyond belief how you people twist the logic.
>
> And if they go home ahead $2200? What does that mean? It has
exactly
> the same meaning. Zilch. Their future expectation will not have
> changed no matter what they do. Your attempt to infer that
advantage
> players always lose is just another one of your lies.
>

Ahhhhhhhhhh.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

> > You're always wrong. Was that French benefits?
>
> Looks like you've never been to France either. Big surprise!

LMAO. You have no idea what I'm referring to.

No, the BIG laugh is how you've never done anything in your life.
Actually, your lack of common lifetime knowledge is a bit on the
pathetic side, but nerds like you can't even see it because of your
continual excitement over any statistic that comes your way. Thanks
to the Internet, nobodys like you can now live a make believe life in
lieu of the one that passed you by in the real world---which
coincidentally is exactly how you approach video poker.

> >
> > Could you be avoiding the question? First, let me answer your
> > assertion. My wife and I are getting along great. Gambling when
and
> > where we want ... living what some would consider to be a
fantastic
> > lifestyle. Now, tell us about that bankruptcy.
>
> Looks to me like you're the one that's lying here. How about it?
Ever
> beat your wife? No lying again--I have proof. Now answer or else!

More lies. You have no clue. Now, tell us about that bankruptcy.

You sure are avoiding the subject.

More denial--what's new? Why not come clean on why you beat your
wife. A little embarrassing perhaps???

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

> > I don't go to casinos every day. Try again moron.
>
> Yes you do--another pile of feel-good BS. Missing one every 11

days doesn't count. You're an addict either way, and a foolish one at

that.

Let's see ... for the last 6 months I have been in casinos less

than

1/2 those days. I guess those must not count either. Wait, you're
using the Rob Singer counting method ... 1+1 = 3. The same math you
use when playing VP.

HA! I've got you to admit you've wasted 90 of the past 180 days
getting your fix in casinos. Now see how easy that was?? So let's see
if little dicky can inch towards the truth about his problem, and
take the high road here for a change....a BIG change. Now how many
days have you REALLY wasted in the joints?

> The only thing you've been planning for the last 10 years was

when to go to a casino, how to get there, and a move to LV. And you
wonder why you're a problem gambler?

Nope. Gambling is just a hobby.

Stop right there! The number ONE denial claimed by addicts.

Don't try to pass off YOUR problems

on me. Clearly, you are much more of an addicted gambler than I'll
ever be. You can't even write a couple of sentences without

bringing it up. Now I know why you keep using the word "denial", it's
part of your legacy.

Kinda hurts, doesn't it little dicky?? I've admitted to having been
one in the past, and you might understand that it's easy to detect
one now. You've got to get past that weight of denial first before
you'll begin to respect whatever life you might have waiting, and
admit you made a HUGE mistake by moving to LV just to play video
poker more often. I can just IMAGINE the sweaty palms BOTH of you had
(nothing like a family that gets their fixes together inside casinos!)
when you were making those "move" plans for your declining (and I do
mean DECLINING) years. I actually can't even fathom living in
LV....let alone MOVING there just because I was an addict for the
game. God bless you.

> > > First, show us where I state my strategy is played only on
> negative machines.
> >
> > Answer this question.
>
> You're avoiding the question, and I won't even read the rest of
this until you answer it. Why are you afraid to? Let me guess....

You've implied several times that EV is not important. Here's one

to get you going.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2502
where you stated "you know I'll win regardless of the pay tables"
This pretty clearly states that you believe the pay tables don't
matter and you'll play YOUR STRATEGY on negative games.

That's a start. But I have yet to see your support for my playing my
strategy only on negative games. Is that the strategy you claim I'm
lying about with my results or is it not? Or are you trying to wiggle
out by saying I now might be truthful about it all, but only because
I stick in a positive game now and then? You're being acey-deucy
about the whole issue. There's never a clear path with you, but you
know that I know why that is.

In any event, the machines' payback has nothing to do with strategy.

So what's new? How many times have I said I don't care about the pay
back in my strategy?? Where do you get your misled understandings
from anyway?

Are you completely fogheaded and don't understand simple English?

Or, as usual, is this just your way of avoiding the truth? The
question at hand is "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK IMPORTANT?" Your silence

below is more than enough evidence to find you guilty of lieing.

Let's give guidance to your attempts here. First, you claim to know
about my play strategy and also claim I'm lying about my results of
winning approx. 87% of the time as well as the overall amount. Then,
you seem to be on the bandwagon that wants me to accept a challenge
to play something other than my strategy, and claim I'm weaseling out
when I say I'll only accept a challenge to play MY play
strategy....the one you & Congo have been criticizing for months.
That's like challenging me to play FPDW only or any Deuces Wild
games. Same result--I'd have declined. Do you get it yet? THEY ARE
NOT WHAT I PLAY. Similarly, I do not play ONLY 99.3% or less games.
Finally, since it's now obvious to both of us that you DO get it,
you're trying to make a case that because I say I can beat a negative
game in any one session, that all 251 of my sessions were all on
negative games. Thus the question: "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK IMPORTANT?"
Answer: In any particular session, it is not. When a player plays for
goals and sticks to those goals with a progression in denom. & game
volatility as well as incorporating holds that go for the larger
winners when the opportunity presents itself, the goals will either
come or they won't--but most of the time they will come and the large
winners will far outweigh the large losses. That's where you get
stuck because you can't compute it without the understanding you
lack. To me--the criticizms come and they go, but the only thing that
matters is the amounts of cash I've taken home from Nevada casinos
over the past 8+ years. If I weren't still doing it almost at will, I
wouldn't be bothering with those like you who obviously have a stray
hair on their butt over the fact that I win and they don't. So goes
envy........

> > > In any one session, it does not matter if the game is 98% or
102%.
> >
> > Yes it does.

And it always will. Kind of hard to face the truth, isn't it?

Read above again and learn. Don't just read your books. Learn to be
educated, even at your old age.

> > > You can win just as easily as you can lose. Happens all the
time every day to millions of players.
> >
> > Almost true ... except for your use of the term "easily". The
> higher the payback the less likely you will lose on any given

game in any given SINGLE session.

Of course, you're speaking of a player like you who'll sit for hours
and hours--playing right on through royals and deuces and aces and
anything else. Nothing's easy for that type of looney toon. For the
player who has goals and has the ability and control to STOP, it IS
easy.

> >
> > Every hand is independent. Win goals make absolutely no
difference in your lifetime results. What may make a difference is

playing poorly when getting tired. If win goals help you avoid that
then they work for you. They may not be required for others. Setting
time limits is another way of accomplishing the same thing.

Obviously with my strategy, win goals make a giant difference.
Lifetime results is what means little to me. I play for the session
result one at a time, and none of the others has any effect on any of
the others. I've scolded you about this before: You can't apply your
long-term regs to short-term play strategy. You don't believe in
short-term strategy because you can't conceive of playing for a short
time when in a casino since the manager has a tight grasp on you.
Someday you'll need to break free of that hold--whether because of
your going broke or you won't be able to handle the unhealthy
atmospheres in those local joints you worship--and only then will you
wake up and smell the Rob Singer roses.

> >
> > > Even if they go home $200 behind after being that far ahead,
they
> > > talk themselves into being 'happy' about such a fiasco

because

> > > they 'earned' $17/hour in phantom bucks for their 11 hours of
> > effort.
> > > It's almost beyond belief how you people twist the logic.
> >
> > And if they go home ahead $2200? What does that mean? It has
> exactly
> > the same meaning. Zilch. Their future expectation will not have
> > changed no matter what they do. Your attempt to infer that
> advantage players always lose is just another one of your lies.

You seem a bit uneasy with that response. And I understand why.
Overwhelmingly, a player who's ahead $1000 rarely gets ahead $2200,
and it's far more probable that he go home more in the hole the more
he stays on to play. Only a fool would play past a big win, and you
know that. If you want to play with the the future and get yourself
deeper into your theoretical 'long-term' then why not just go home
and play some more on Winpoker? At least you'll still have the cash
from the royal. But you can't, and so-called AP's can't, because
they're all a bunch of overly addicted players who have no concept of
what they are or why they cannot stop playing. The only reason a
player continues on in a session after hitting a royal is because
they're feeling confident, cocky, and invincible. I've grown beyond
all that baloney, and people like you can't stand me for it. That's a
major reason why I'm lovin' every minute of it!

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > > You're always wrong. Was that French benefits?
> >
> > Looks like you've never been to France either. Big surprise!
>
> LMAO. You have no idea what I'm referring to.

No, the BIG laugh is how you've never done anything in your life.

Spoken by someone who still has no idea. Someone who doesn't
understand common phrases and icons. LMAO.

Actually, your lack of common lifetime knowledge is a bit on the
pathetic side, but nerds like you can't even see it because of your
continual excitement over any statistic that comes your way. Thanks
to the Internet, nobodys like you can now live a make believe life

in

lieu of the one that passed you by in the real world---which
coincidentally is exactly how you approach video poker.

Now, about Dilberts' manager again. You wouldn't qualify for his job.
Even your opinion of yourself is a fraud. I've been and done so much
more than you that it isn't even close. And, guess what, I don't need
to make it up or brag about it. I have self confidence. All you have
is jealousy.

>
> > >
> > > Could you be avoiding the question? First, let me answer your
> > > assertion. My wife and I are getting along great. Gambling

when

> and
> > > where we want ... living what some would consider to be a
> fantastic
> > > lifestyle. Now, tell us about that bankruptcy.
> >
> > Looks to me like you're the one that's lying here. How about

it?

> Ever
> > beat your wife? No lying again--I have proof. Now answer or

else!

>
> More lies. You have no clue. Now, tell us about that bankruptcy.
You sure are avoiding the subject.

More denial--what's new? Why not come clean on why you beat your
wife. A little embarrassing perhaps???

I bet you've never even heard of the phrase "Have you stopped beating
your wife?" It's a well known joke question that has no reasonable
answer and just about everyone has heard it before ... apparently
everyone but you who is attempting to say the same thing. Have you
been in a cave for your entire life? Or, prison? You're so stupid
even your attempts to attack my character are idiotic. I no longer
need to point out your inadequacies. You do a fine job for me. Now,
back to that bankruptcy. What scam were you selling at that time?

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > > I don't go to casinos every day. Try again moron.
> >
> > Yes you do--another pile of feel-good BS. Missing one every 11
days doesn't count. You're an addict either way, and a foolish one

at

> that.
>
> Let's see ... for the last 6 months I have been in casinos less
than
> 1/2 those days. I guess those must not count either. Wait, you're
> using the Rob Singer counting method ... 1+1 = 3. The same math

you

> use when playing VP.

HA! I've got you to admit you've wasted 90 of the past 180 days
getting your fix in casinos.

No, I said LESS THAN half. I guess that math ability of yours also
applies to logic.

Now see how easy that was?? So let's see
if little dicky can inch towards the truth about his problem, and
take the high road here for a change....a BIG change. Now how many
days have you REALLY wasted in the joints?

I went to the casinos because that is EXACTLY what I wanted to do.
Just because you're addicted and can't control what you do doesn't
mean the rest of us are. Some of those days I only spend a couple of
hours sometimes more. It called self control. If either my wife or
myself is not enjoying ourselves, we move on.

>
> > The only thing you've been planning for the last 10 years was
when to go to a casino, how to get there, and a move to LV. And you
wonder why you're a problem gambler?
>
> Nope. Gambling is just a hobby.

Stop right there! The number ONE denial claimed by addicts.

No, the number one reason you use to attack others. Guess what? You
have no idea who is addicted and who isn't. Get over it.

Don't try to pass off YOUR problems
> on me. Clearly, you are much more of an addicted gambler than

I'll

> ever be. You can't even write a couple of sentences without
bringing it up. Now I know why you keep using the word "denial",

it's

part of your legacy.

Kinda hurts, doesn't it little dicky?? I've admitted to having been
one in the past,

And, you still can't get over the FACT that some of us can gamble and
not be addicted. It's that poor opinion of yourself that you keep
trying to transfer on to everyone else. It's your problem, suck it up
and admit that you have weaknesses that most others do not.

>
> > > > First, show us where I state my strategy is played only on
> > negative machines.
> > >
> > > Answer this question.
> >
> > You're avoiding the question, and I won't even read the rest of
> this until you answer it. Why are you afraid to? Let me guess....
>
> You've implied several times that EV is not important. Here's one
to get you going.
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2502
> where you stated "you know I'll win regardless of the pay tables"
> This pretty clearly states that you believe the pay tables don't
> matter and you'll play YOUR STRATEGY on negative games.

That's a start. But I have yet to see your support for my playing

my

strategy only on negative games.

Talk about denial. Go back and reread your last article that you
posted on this forum. Don't you even understand what you are writing?
You made it very clear that you don't think the pay tables are
important. If that is the case, why would anyone believe the pay
table selection is part of your strategy?

Is that the strategy you claim I'm
lying about with my results or is it not?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/190

You said "There's a few casinos with >100% around, but it's rare. In
any case, I almost always play BP--whether it be 8/5, 7/5, or 6/5.
Since I usually win, I don't need your positive games anyway."

Now what part of "I don't need your positive games" did I
misunderstand?

Or are you trying to wiggle
out by saying I now might be truthful about it all,

LMAO. You and the truth are complete strangers as I have, once again,
shown without any doubt.

>
> In any event, the machines' payback has nothing to do with

strategy.

So what's new? How many times have I said I don't care about the

pay

back in my strategy?? Where do you get your misled understandings
from anyway?

Where you said it was part of your strategy. This is kind of like
talking to someone who has completely lost their memory of what they
said in the last couple of days.

>Are you completely fogheaded and don't understand simple English?
Or, as usual, is this just your way of avoiding the truth? The
question at hand is "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK IMPORTANT?" Your

silence

>below is more than enough evidence to find you guilty of lieing.

Let's give guidance to your attempts here. First, you claim to know
about my play strategy

Lie, I said I didn't care about your play strategy because NO play
strategy can change the expectation. Are you sure this last move of
yours wasn't from a deserted island to a psychiatric care facility?

and also claim I'm lying about my results of
winning approx. 87% of the time as well as the overall amount.

Ho hum. Another lie. I've never said that. You should win over 80% of
the time playing a 5 level progression. It's the amount you lose that
is subject for debate.

Then,
you seem to be on the bandwagon that wants me to accept a challenge
to play something other than my strategy,

Just above you stated that the paybck wasn't part of your strategy,
now you're back saying it is. Do you get cross-eyed with this flip
flopping?

and claim I'm weaseling out
when I say I'll only accept a challenge to play MY play
strategy....the one you & Congo have been criticizing for months.

Flip.

That's like challenging me to play FPDW only or any Deuces Wild
games.

Flop. Your progessive system has nothing to do with the expectation.
The only thing required was for you to back up your statements like
the one above. "I don't need your positive games". Like I said a
couple of weeks ago. We can debate the merits of a progessive system.
That's another issue, however, for any method of play to be generally
successful it must be played with a positive expectation.

Same result--I'd have declined. Do you get it yet? THEY ARE
NOT WHAT I PLAY. Similarly, I do not play ONLY 99.3% or less games.

Then, you're simply saying you've been lieing all along.

Finally, since it's now obvious to both of us that you DO get it,
you're trying to make a case that because I say I can beat a

negative

game in any one session, that all 251 of my sessions were all on
negative games. Thus the question: "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK

IMPORTANT?"

Answer: In any particular session, it is not.

Yes, it is. It's just a matter of degrees. If someone plays negative
games once in a great while then it's clearly not a big deal. If they
play them most of the time and think some progressive hocus pocus is
going to make them a long term winner, then it IS a BIG DEAL.

When a player plays for
goals and sticks to those goals with a progression in denom. & game
volatility as well as incorporating holds that go for the larger
winners when the opportunity presents itself, the goals will either
come or they won't--but most of the time they will come and the

large

winners will far outweigh the large losses.

No. This is where you are confusing the Martingale progressions'
ability to increase the number of session wins with the FACT that it
cannot change the overall expectation. Sorry, the increase in
volatility will only lead to a wider spread in the bell curve, but
that's it. In other words, there will be a few more people that come
home winners and few more that have diasterous losses. The overall
payback remains the same. And, if they play with negative
expecatations, far more folks will lose than will win.

That's where you get
stuck because you can't compute it without the understanding you
lack.

It's easily computable. It's called simple math.

To me--the criticizms come and they go, but the only thing that
matters is the amounts of cash I've taken home from Nevada casinos
over the past 8+ years. If I weren't still doing it almost at will,

I

wouldn't be bothering with those like you who obviously have a

stray

hair on their butt over the fact that I win and they don't. So goes
envy........

Back to the BS. You were almost making sense for a while.

> > > > In any one session, it does not matter if the game is 98%

or

> 102%.
> > >
> > > Yes it does.
>
> And it always will. Kind of hard to face the truth, isn't it?

Read above again and learn. Don't just read your books. Learn to be
educated, even at your old age.

It takes very little education to spot a scam as obvious as yours.
Simple math applied to VP shows, beyond any doubt, that you are
lieing.

>
> > > > You can win just as easily as you can lose. Happens all the
> time every day to millions of players.
> > >
> > > Almost true ... except for your use of the term "easily".

The

> > higher the payback the less likely you will lose on any given
game in any given SINGLE session.

Of course, you're speaking of a player like you who'll sit for

hours

and hours--playing right on through royals and deuces and aces and
anything else.

Since they have no bearing on one's long term results it doesn't
matter. What matters is playing with a positive expectation. This
often means quitting before you start making mistakes.

Nothing's easy for that type of looney toon. For the
player who has goals and has the ability and control to STOP, it IS
easy.

Thank you. This is one of your few compliments to the APs.

> > >
> > > Every hand is independent. Win goals make absolutely no
> difference in your lifetime results. What may make a difference

is

playing poorly when getting tired. If win goals help you avoid that
then they work for you. They may not be required for others.

Setting

time limits is another way of accomplishing the same thing.

Obviously with my strategy, win goals make a giant difference.

No. It only helps you quit before making mistakes.

Lifetime results is what means little to me.

LMAO.

I play for the session
result one at a time, and none of the others has any effect on any

of

the others.

No, no HAND has any effect on any of the others.

I've scolded you about this before: You can't apply your
long-term regs to short-term play strategy.

There is no such thing as a short term play strategy. That is a scam.
What part of "independent" hands don't you understand? Nothing is
reset when you quit. Nothing is changed the next day or the next
week.

You don't believe in
short-term strategy because you can't conceive of playing for a

short

time when in a casino since the manager has a tight grasp on you.

No, I know it's a scam. Pure and simple.

> > >
> > > > Even if they go home $200 behind after being that far

ahead,

> they
> > > > talk themselves into being 'happy' about such a fiasco
because
> > > > they 'earned' $17/hour in phantom bucks for their 11 hours

of

> > > effort.
> > > > It's almost beyond belief how you people twist the logic.
> > >
> > > And if they go home ahead $2200? What does that mean? It has
> > exactly
> > > the same meaning. Zilch. Their future expectation will not

have

> > > changed no matter what they do. Your attempt to infer that
> > advantage players always lose is just another one of your lies.

You seem a bit uneasy with that response.

Not in the least. I just present the facts.

And I understand why.

Sure you do.

Overwhelmingly, a player who's ahead $1000 rarely gets ahead $2200,
and it's far more probable that he go home more in the hole the

more

he stays on to play.

No. The probabilty doesn't change. The expectation is the same on
every hand. You can't change the facts with erroneous assertions.

Only a fool would play past a big win, and you
know that.

Only a fool would make statements like you just did. What part
of "independent" hands don't you understand?

If you want to play with the the future and get yourself
deeper into your theoretical 'long-term' then why not just go home
and play some more on Winpoker?

Sorry, winpoker doesn't pay in real cash.

At least you'll still have the cash
from the royal. But you can't, and so-called AP's can't, because
they're all a bunch of overly addicted players who have no concept

of

what they are or why they cannot stop playing.

This is where you show your true colors. Once again, you have the
need to call ALL APs addicted. It is so obvious to everyone that it's
your ego that can't accept that others have succeeded where you
failed.

The only reason a
player continues on in a session after hitting a royal is because
they're feeling confident, cocky, and invincible.

Or, they understand simple math. I imagine that poor women that hit 3
RFs in two hours the other day is feeling very remorseful about her
decision to play on.

I've grown beyond
all that baloney, and people like you can't stand me for it. That's

a

major reason why I'm lovin' every minute of it!

Sure you are.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

Spoken by someone who still has no idea. Someone who doesn't
understand common phrases and icons. LMAO.

Common amongst whom....NERDS!!!?!

> Actually, your lack of common lifetime knowledge is a bit on the
> pathetic side, but nerds like you can't even see it because of

your

> continual excitement over any statistic that comes your way.

Thanks

> to the Internet, nobodys like you can now live a make believe

life

in
> lieu of the one that passed you by in the real world---which
> coincidentally is exactly how you approach video poker.

Now, about Dilberts' manager again. You wouldn't qualify for his

job. Even your opinion of yourself is a fraud. I've been and done so
much more than you that it isn't even close. And, guess what, I don't
need to make it up or brag about it. I have self confidence. All you
have is jealousy.

Ooops! Looks like damage control once again! You know I've got your
number and it makes you sore. And sorry. You're an Internet geek who
makes believe he's had and has a life as you stroll thru websites,
when all you are is another video poker addict who's been bamboozled
by his (and her apparently) habit into moving to LV just to be closer
to the machines and the locals joints that people like you go gaga
over. And YOU have self-confidence? HAHAHAHA!!!! You wouldn't know
what to do without a casino nearby! I'd say "get a life" but it's all
passsed you by so very long ago.....

> >
>
> More denial--what's new? Why not come clean on why you beat your
> wife. A little embarrassing perhaps???

I bet you've never even heard of the phrase "Have you stopped

beating

your wife?" It's a well known joke question that has no reasonable
answer and just about everyone has heard it before ... apparently
everyone but you who is attempting to say the same thing. Have you
been in a cave for your entire life? Or, prison? You're so stupid
even your attempts to attack my character are idiotic. I no longer
need to point out your inadequacies. You do a fine job for me. Now,
back to that bankruptcy. What scam were you selling at that time?

Got to you, didn't I..... Maybe I'll get some of my prison buddies to
pay you a visit and spank you for mistreating your wife (physically
AND emotionally that is) and I'll also have them help you kick the
nasty vp habit. Now how about responding with something other than
the same old BS!

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

> HA! I've got you to admit you've wasted 90 of the past 180 days
> getting your fix in casinos.

No, I said LESS THAN half. I guess that math ability of yours also
applies to logic.

I took that into consideration, but since you've been seen in casinos
almost daily for the past week, I'm allowing for the geek-factor,
which says you're trying to make yourself appear just a tad bit more
rational than you really are.

> Now see how easy that was?? So let's see
> if little dicky can inch towards the truth about his problem, and
> take the high road here for a change....a BIG change. Now how

many

> days have you REALLY wasted in the joints?

I went to the casinos because that is EXACTLY what I wanted to do.
Just because you're addicted and can't control what you do doesn't
mean the rest of us are. Some of those days I only spend a couple

of hours sometimes more. It called self control. If either my wife or

myself is not enjoying ourselves, we move on.

Right...... So now do you feel better that you've talked yourself
into it?

> > > The only thing you've been planning for the last 10 years was
> when to go to a casino, how to get there, and a move to LV. And

you

> wonder why you're a problem gambler?
> >
> > Nope. Gambling is just a hobby.
>
> Stop right there! The number ONE denial claimed by addicts.

No, the number one reason you use to attack others. Guess what? You
have no idea who is addicted and who isn't. Get over it.

Denial, denial, denial..... Someday when you come to me for help,
I'll listen. But not today bozo!

And, you still can't get over the FACT that some of us can gamble

and not be addicted.

Go ahead, keep painting that rosey picture of yourself. Keep on
saying that "I'm not an addict, I'm not an addict....even though I
live for casinos and brag about getting 26 RF's in 6 months but said
it was due to....My HOBBY!!!" Yup--you're an A+ whack job all right.

> That's a start. But I have yet to see your support for my playing
my strategy only on negative games.

Talk about denial. Go back and reread your last article that you
posted on this forum. Don't you even understand what you are

writing?

You made it very clear that you don't think the pay tables are
important. If that is the case, why would anyone believe the pay
table selection is part of your strategy?

Duh, Einstein is at it again. Your assuming again, and geeks don't do
that. So all you can come up with is that I LIED? about what pay
tables I use? Read the strategy again and explain why that is. Then
come back with something remotely intelligent. Talk about never
wanting to face reality. Imagine living with you??

> Is that the strategy you claim I'm
> lying about with my results or is it not?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/190

You said "There's a few casinos with >100% around, but it's rare.

In

any case, I almost always play BP--whether it be 8/5, 7/5, or 6/5.
Since I usually win, I don't need your positive games anyway."

Now what part of "I don't need your positive games" did I
misunderstand?

Hello McFly? Do you ever get it right? BP is 25% of my strategy. And
how m,any times do I need to say I don't require positive games to be
winning like I do? But I do use them on occasion, as is when they're
available McFLY! HELLO!!! Anyone home in there??

> > In any event, the machines' payback has nothing to do with
strategy.
>
> So what's new? How many times have I said I don't care about the
pay
> back in my strategy?? Where do you get your misled understandings
> from anyway?

Where you said it was part of your strategy. This is kind of like
talking to someone who has completely lost their memory of what

they said in the last couple of days.

Everything's "kind of like" with you because you have little
comprehension of what's going on, if any.

> >Are you completely fogheaded and don't understand simple

English?

> Let's give guidance to your attempts here. First, you claim to

know about my play strategy

Lie, I said I didn't care about your play strategy because NO play
strategy can change the expectation. Are you sure this last move of
yours wasn't from a deserted island to a psychiatric care facility?

So then explain to me, Mr. genius, why you've repeatedly said I can't
possibly win with my play strategy, and that I've lied all about the
results. Are you now saying you said that as another one of your
assumptions WITHOUT understanding how I play?

> and also claim I'm lying about my results of
> winning approx. 87% of the time as well as the overall amount.

Ho hum. Another lie. I've never said that. You should win over 80%

of the time playing a 5 level progression. It's the amount you lose
that is subject for debate.

I play a 6-level progression, so you're face-saving attempt looks
better now thanks to my help once again. The amount I lose is
reproted, but the debate is because of your jealousy about me. You
just don't WANT it to be that way, but guess what? The nerd comes in
2hd place again, and in this case, 2nd place is LAST place.

> Then,
> you seem to be on the bandwagon that wants me to accept a

challenge to play something other than my strategy,

Just above you stated that the paybck wasn't part of your strategy,
now you're back saying it is. Do you get cross-eyed with this flip
flopping?

More confusion I see. Just re-read the strategy, and if you're
courageous enough (and have the cash) to challenge me to a 50-session
play playing MY written strategy (you know, the one you don't believe
in and call me a liar and a fraud for) then let's do it! Otherwise,
you're just another loser weenie looking for a nut.

> That's like challenging me to play FPDW only or any Deuces Wild
> games.

Flop. Your progessive system has nothing to do with the

expectation.

The only thing required was for you to back up your statements like
the one above. "I don't need your positive games". Like I said a
couple of weeks ago. We can debate the merits of a progessive

system.

That's another issue, however, for any method of play to be

generally

successful it must be played with a positive expectation.

Looks like you're the one afraid if I play a positive game in my
strategy or not. So how about it, big boy. Want to bet on my
strategy, or you gonna keep living your fantasy of all negative games
forever?? Step up to the plate this time instead of flippity-flopping
away with your tail between your legs.

> Same result--I'd have declined. Do you get it yet? THEY ARE
> NOT WHAT I PLAY. Similarly, I do not play ONLY 99.3% or less

games.

Then, you're simply saying you've been lieing all along.

Huh?? Read the strategy and get back with something other than
another geek-assumption!

> Finally, since it's now obvious to both of us that you DO get it,
> you're trying to make a case that because I say I can beat a
negative
> game in any one session, that all 251 of my sessions were all on
> negative games. Thus the question: "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK
IMPORTANT?"
> Answer: In any particular session, it is not.

Yes, it is. It's just a matter of degrees. If someone plays

negative

games once in a great while then it's clearly not a big deal. If

they

play them most of the time and think some progressive hocus pocus

is

going to make them a long term winner, then it IS a BIG DEAL.

Blah blah blah.....As I said, it's a wonder that you [eople with such
twisted minds actually can live with yourselves.

> When a player plays for
> goals and sticks to those goals with a progression in denom. &

game

> volatility as well as incorporating holds that go for the larger
> winners when the opportunity presents itself, the goals will

either

> come or they won't--but most of the time they will come and the
large
> winners will far outweigh the large losses.

No. This is where you are confusing the Martingale progressions'
ability to increase the number of session wins with the FACT that

it

cannot change the overall expectation. Sorry, the increase in
volatility will only lead to a wider spread in the bell curve, but
that's it. In other words, there will be a few more people that

come

home winners and few more that have diasterous losses. The overall
payback remains the same. And, if they play with negative
expecatations, far more folks will lose than will win.

> That's where you get
> stuck because you can't compute it without the understanding you
> lack.

It's easily computable. It's called simple math.

> To me--the criticizms come and they go, but the only thing that
> matters is the amounts of cash I've taken home from Nevada

casinos

> over the past 8+ years. If I weren't still doing it almost at

will,

I
> wouldn't be bothering with those like you who obviously have a
stray
> hair on their butt over the fact that I win and they don't. So

goes

> envy........

Back to the BS. You were almost making sense for a while.

Zing!
I've eliminated the rest of your stupidity because how much nonsense
about long-term strategy can a sane person read. The only important
parts were what I wrote....in addition to the part where I made you
look foolish for being a RS groupie. Gobble it up, little dicky. It's
the best part of your day! By FAR!!!

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> Spoken by someone who still has no idea. Someone who doesn't
> understand common phrases and icons. LMAO.

Common amongst whom....NERDS!!!?!

The human race. At least those of us who have been out of prison and
in touch with the rest of society.

>
> > Actually, your lack of common lifetime knowledge is a bit on

the

> > pathetic side, but nerds like you can't even see it because of
your
> > continual excitement over any statistic that comes your way.
Thanks
> > to the Internet, nobodys like you can now live a make believe
life
> in
> > lieu of the one that passed you by in the real world---which
> > coincidentally is exactly how you approach video poker.
>
> Now, about Dilberts' manager again. You wouldn't qualify for his
job. Even your opinion of yourself is a fraud. I've been and done

so

much more than you that it isn't even close. And, guess what, I

don't

need to make it up or brag about it. I have self confidence. All

you

have is jealousy.

Ooops! Looks like damage control once again! You know I've got your
number and it makes you sore. And sorry. You're an Internet geek

who

makes believe he's had and has a life as you stroll thru websites,
when all you are is another video poker addict who's been

bamboozled

by his (and her apparently) habit into moving to LV just to be

closer

to the machines and the locals joints that people like you go gaga
over. And YOU have self-confidence? HAHAHAHA!!!! You wouldn't know
what to do without a casino nearby! I'd say "get a life" but it's

all

passsed you by so very long ago.....

LMAO. Talking about yourself again monkey boy? It's so obvious to the
rest of us and you are so blinded by your own ego that you can't see
it.

>
> > >
> >
> > More denial--what's new? Why not come clean on why you beat

your

> > wife. A little embarrassing perhaps???
>
> I bet you've never even heard of the phrase "Have you stopped
beating
> your wife?" It's a well known joke question that has no

reasonable

> answer and just about everyone has heard it before ... apparently
> everyone but you who is attempting to say the same thing. Have

you

> been in a cave for your entire life? Or, prison? You're so stupid
> even your attempts to attack my character are idiotic. I no

longer

> need to point out your inadequacies. You do a fine job for me.

Now,

> back to that bankruptcy. What scam were you selling at that time?

Got to you, didn't I.....

Nope. The only one you keep GETTING to is yourself. Each and every
one of your posts shows just how stupid you are.

Maybe I'll get some of my prison buddies to
pay you a visit and spank you for mistreating your wife (physically
AND emotionally that is) and I'll also have them help you kick the
nasty vp habit. Now how about responding with something other than
the same old BS!

You're the one with the BS. All my responses are reasonable. I mean
anyone who would even comtemplate asking "Have you stopped beating
your wife?" is so totally out of touch with reality that it's
unbelieveable. And, then you start claiming that you've gotten to me
is even more evidence that YOU have been nailed ...again.

At least you finally admitted you have "prison buddies".

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > HA! I've got you to admit you've wasted 90 of the past 180 days
> > getting your fix in casinos.
>
> No, I said LESS THAN half. I guess that math ability of yours

also

> applies to logic.

I took that into consideration, but since you've been seen in

casinos

almost daily for the past week, I'm allowing for the geek-factor,
which says you're trying to make yourself appear just a tad bit

more

rational than you really are.

Then you are admitting you don't understand simple logic. What a
surprise. Now, since you can't understand simple logical expressions
let me be more specific. LESS THAN HALF THE DAYS (or something maybe
even you can comprehend) means 65 out of 183 days between 4/10 and
10/10. And most of them were for 3 hours or less.

>
> > Now see how easy that was?? So let's see
> > if little dicky can inch towards the truth about his problem,

and

> > take the high road here for a change....a BIG change. Now how
many
> > days have you REALLY wasted in the joints?
>
> I went to the casinos because that is EXACTLY what I wanted to

do.

> Just because you're addicted and can't control what you do

doesn't

> mean the rest of us are. Some of those days I only spend a couple
of hours sometimes more. It called self control. If either my wife

or

> myself is not enjoying ourselves, we move on.

Right...... So now do you feel better that you've talked yourself
into it?

Just the facts. Someday you will look in the mirror and realize
you're the one with the problems.

>
> > > > The only thing you've been planning for the last 10 years

was

> > when to go to a casino, how to get there, and a move to LV. And
you
> > wonder why you're a problem gambler?
> > >
> > > Nope. Gambling is just a hobby.
> >
> > Stop right there! The number ONE denial claimed by addicts.
>
> No, the number one reason you use to attack others. Guess what?

You

> have no idea who is addicted and who isn't. Get over it.

Denial, denial, denial..... Someday when you come to me for help,
I'll listen. But not today bozo!

More denial is right. The only problem is YOU are the one in denial.
You still can't accept that YOU are the one with the problem. Since
you know almost nothing about the people you call addicted, just what
does that mean? It means you are transferring your own failures on to
others. Sorry, everyone here can it as clear as day. Your rants are
worthless because we all know they are simply about yourself.

>
> And, you still can't get over the FACT that some of us can gamble
and not be addicted.

Go ahead, keep painting that rosey picture of yourself. Keep on
saying that "I'm not an addict, I'm not an addict....even though I
live for casinos and brag about getting 26 RF's in 6 months but

said

it was due to....My HOBBY!!!" Yup--you're an A+ whack job all right.

I'm not an addict, I'm not an addict ... YOU ARE.

> > That's a start. But I have yet to see your support for my

playing

> my strategy only on negative games.
>
> Talk about denial. Go back and reread your last article that you
> posted on this forum. Don't you even understand what you are
writing?
> You made it very clear that you don't think the pay tables are
> important. If that is the case, why would anyone believe the pay
> table selection is part of your strategy?

Duh, Einstein is at it again. Your assuming again, and geeks don't

do

that. So all you can come up with is that I LIED? about what pay
tables I use? Read the strategy again and explain why that is. Then
come back with something remotely intelligent. Talk about never
wanting to face reality. Imagine living with you??

LMAO. Your stumbling all over yourself, again. I think your first
word said it all, "Duh". We all know the truth in that. Now, do what
I said. Go back and read your post and see exactly what you said
about pay tables.

>
> > Is that the strategy you claim I'm
> > lying about with my results or is it not?
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/190
>
> You said "There's a few casinos with >100% around, but it's rare.
In
> any case, I almost always play BP--whether it be 8/5, 7/5, or

6/5.

> Since I usually win, I don't need your positive games anyway."
>
> Now what part of "I don't need your positive games" did I
> misunderstand?

Hello McFly? Do you ever get it right? BP is 25% of my strategy.

And

how m,any times do I need to say I don't require positive games to

be

winning like I do? But I do use them on occasion, as is when

they're

available McFLY! HELLO!!! Anyone home in there??

Hey, it's your own words. Anyone can go back and check the post. What
part of "I don't need your positive games" did I misunderstand? You
are so nailed.

>
> > > In any event, the machines' payback has nothing to do with
> strategy.
> >
> > So what's new? How many times have I said I don't care about

the

> pay
> > back in my strategy?? Where do you get your misled

understandings

> > from anyway?
>
> Where you said it was part of your strategy. This is kind of like
> talking to someone who has completely lost their memory of what
they said in the last couple of days.

Everything's "kind of like" with you because you have little
comprehension of what's going on, if any.

Sure, monkey boy. Or, maybe Mr. flip-flop would be more fitting.

>
> > >Are you completely fogheaded and don't understand simple
English?
> > Let's give guidance to your attempts here. First, you claim to
know about my play strategy
>
> Lie, I said I didn't care about your play strategy because NO

play

> strategy can change the expectation. Are you sure this last move

of

> yours wasn't from a deserted island to a psychiatric care

facility?

So then explain to me, Mr. genius, why you've repeatedly said I

can't

possibly win with my play strategy,

Lie. I've never said that. Now, concentrate. Listen carefully, I'll
say it one more time. ... Your strategy (or any strategy) cannot turn
a negative expectation game into a positive one. Now, got that? If
not, go back and reread it again. It's really simple. Now, if you
want to play your strategy on positive machines, I have no problem.

and that I've lied all about the
results.

I've said it is very possible that you've lied since you lie about
everything else.

Are you now saying you said that as another one of your
assumptions WITHOUT understanding how I play?

I understand exactly how you play. Exactly like everyone else ... one
hand at a time. The only thing that matters is the machine
expectation (hopefully positive) and how you play the hand (so it
stays positive).

>
> > and also claim I'm lying about my results of
> > winning approx. 87% of the time as well as the overall amount.
>
> Ho hum. Another lie. I've never said that. You should win over

80%

of the time playing a 5 level progression. It's the amount you lose
that is subject for debate.

I play a 6-level progression,

Is that so ... from

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/838

You stated,

"and because of the progression (in this case, $1/$2/$5/$10/$25)"

Sure sounds like a five level progression to me. In any event, the
number of progressions has no effect on the expectation. I really
don't care if you play 2 levels or 9 levels.

so you're face-saving attempt looks
better now thanks to my help once again.

Nope. You just keep looking as stupid as ever.

The amount I lose is
reproted, but the debate is because of your jealousy about me. You
just don't WANT it to be that way, but guess what? The nerd comes

in

2hd place again, and in this case, 2nd place is LAST place.

Next time try adding in a fact or two in your idiotic response. With
your own admission to playing a 5 level progression that I quoted and
your attmept to deny it now, the only thing you've accomplished is
proving, once again, that you are a liar.

>
> > Then,
> > you seem to be on the bandwagon that wants me to accept a
challenge to play something other than my strategy,
>
> Just above you stated that the paybck wasn't part of your

strategy,

> now you're back saying it is. Do you get cross-eyed with this

flip

> flopping?

More confusion I see. Just re-read the strategy, and if you're
courageous enough (and have the cash) to challenge me to a 50-

session

play playing MY written strategy (you know, the one you don't

believe

in and call me a liar and a fraud for) then let's do it! Otherwise,
you're just another loser weenie looking for a nut.

Like I said before, if you're willing to admit you play your strategy
on positive machines, then there is no debate. All the lies you've
been saying about winning on negative machines are simply lies. I've
accomplished exactly what I set out to accomplish.

>
> > That's like challenging me to play FPDW only or any Deuces Wild
> > games.
>
> Flop. Your progessive system has nothing to do with the
expectation.
> The only thing required was for you to back up your statements

like

> the one above. "I don't need your positive games". Like I said a
> couple of weeks ago. We can debate the merits of a progessive
system.
> That's another issue, however, for any method of play to be
generally
> successful it must be played with a positive expectation.

Looks like you're the one afraid if I play a positive game in my
strategy or not.

Why would I be afraid. It's simply an admission on your part that
you've been lieing all along.

So how about it, big boy. Want to bet on my
strategy, or you gonna keep living your fantasy of all negative

games

forever?? Step up to the plate this time instead of flippity-

flopping

away with your tail between your legs.

This is great. You're sitting there admitting to all your lies and
you don't even realize it.

>
> > Finally, since it's now obvious to both of us that you DO get

it,

> > you're trying to make a case that because I say I can beat a
> negative
> > game in any one session, that all 251 of my sessions were all

on

> > negative games. Thus the question: "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK
> IMPORTANT?"
> > Answer: In any particular session, it is not.
>
> Yes, it is. It's just a matter of degrees. If someone plays
negative
> games once in a great while then it's clearly not a big deal. If
they
> play them most of the time and think some progressive hocus pocus
is
> going to make them a long term winner, then it IS a BIG DEAL.

Blah blah blah.....As I said, it's a wonder that you [eople with

such

twisted minds actually can live with yourselves.

Facts have always gotten a similar reply from you.

>
> > When a player plays for
> > goals and sticks to those goals with a progression in denom. &
game
> > volatility as well as incorporating holds that go for the

larger

> > winners when the opportunity presents itself, the goals will
either
> > come or they won't--but most of the time they will come and the
> large
> > winners will far outweigh the large losses.
>
> No. This is where you are confusing the Martingale progressions'
> ability to increase the number of session wins with the FACT that
it
> cannot change the overall expectation. Sorry, the increase in
> volatility will only lead to a wider spread in the bell curve,

but

> that's it. In other words, there will be a few more people that
come
> home winners and few more that have diasterous losses. The

overall

> payback remains the same. And, if they play with negative
> expecatations, far more folks will lose than will win.
>
> > That's where you get
> > stuck because you can't compute it without the understanding

you

> > lack.

LMAO. You have admitted your strategy requires positive machines and
you won't wager anyone unless you can play them. Now, you come back
with statements like this. I love it.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

> Common amongst whom....NERDS!!!?!

The human race. At least those of us who have been out of prison

and in touch with the rest of society.

How long you been out of prison?

> Ooops! Looks like damage control once again! You know I've got

your

> number and it makes you sore. And sorry. You're an Internet geek
who
> makes believe he's had and has a life as you stroll thru

websites,

> when all you are is another video poker addict who's been
bamboozled
> by his (and her apparently) habit into moving to LV just to be
closer
> to the machines and the locals joints that people like you go

gaga

> over. And YOU have self-confidence? HAHAHAHA!!!! You wouldn't

know

> what to do without a casino nearby! I'd say "get a life" but it's
all
> passsed you by so very long ago.....

LMAO. Talking about yourself again monkey boy? It's so obvious to

the rest of us and you are so blinded by your own ego that you can't
see it.

Doesn't take much of an ego to see that you moved to LV out of an
addiction, to go along with those four sweaty hands.

Nope. The only one you keep GETTING to is yourself. Each and every
one of your posts shows just how stupid you are.

Then I LOVE to be stupid, because it irks you no end!

> Maybe I'll get some of my prison buddies to
> pay you a visit and spank you for mistreating your wife

(physically

> AND emotionally that is) and I'll also have them help you kick

the

> nasty vp habit. Now how about responding with something other

than

> the same old BS!

You're the one with the BS. All my responses are reasonable. I mean
anyone who would even comtemplate asking "Have you stopped beating
your wife?" is so totally out of touch with reality that it's
unbelieveable. And, then you start claiming that you've gotten to

me is even more evidence that YOU have been nailed ...again.

Here's some help, and I'll offer it up for free since you both are
gambling addictts that need every spare penny to throw into the
machines on your DAILY trots: You can do one of your famous looking
up on the Internet for statistics if it makes you feel better, but
the common, normal person knows that LV is home to more domestic
violence than any other major city. Why? Yup--Because of the
gambling. Just by your irritability with me and the fact that I win
so often and so much, I can see why it affects you at home. Don't
fret though. You're in the same predicament as all the other gold
diggers who came to town thinking they could make withdrawals as easy
as 1-2-3....just like Yuri the "EXPERT" vp player. In fact, VPFree's
got a bundle of them who blab incessantly about "the upcoming move"
and how they just can't wait, then all you see for a few months after
the arrival is post after post after post about their prowess, the
freebies they get, and a hoard of frivilous questions because they're
all pumped up about being a fantasy player that's on their way
to "being like Mike". But then guess what happens. Righto! There's a
silence only a machine shop factory foreman could love. To those of
us not affected by that disease all you so-called "AP's" tote around
with you, it's as predictable as a sunny day in the desert.

At least you finally admitted you have "prison buddies".

Several of them sport 'tear drops' as well.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

> I took that into consideration, but since you've been seen in
casinos
> almost daily for the past week, I'm allowing for the geek-factor,
> which says you're trying to make yourself appear just a tad bit
more rational than you really are.

Then you are admitting you don't understand simple logic. What a
surprise. Now, since you can't understand simple logical

expressions

let me be more specific. LESS THAN HALF THE DAYS (or something

maybe

even you can comprehend) means 65 out of 183 days between 4/10 and
10/10. And most of them were for 3 hours or less.

If you're trying to say you're running out of money, I understand.

> of hours sometimes more. It called self control. If either my

wife

or
> > myself is not enjoying ourselves, we move on.
>
> Right...... So now do you feel better that you've talked yourself
> into it?

Just the facts. Someday you will look in the mirror and realize
you're the one with the problems.

Let's see....."self-control" as defined by a LV 'advantage player':
The ability to drive oneself to any and all casinos on a daily basis
where rope-'em-in slot club deals await.

You still can't accept that YOU are the one with the problem. Since
you know almost nothing about the people you call addicted, just

what does that mean? It means you are transferring your own failures
on to others. Sorry, everyone here can it as clear as day. Your rants
are worthless because we all know they are simply about yourself.

As I sit here not-so-fat, happy and successful from video poker play,
and I have absolutely no desire to live in such a scum-ridden, crime-
leading city as Las Vegas, I find myself debating the presence of a
gambling problem with someone who moved to LV just to feed his
addiction and be closer to the machines. While I couldn't care less
about being a stone's throw from a promotion or a 10/7 machine, my
opposition can only say he's there because of a "hobby" that sucks
the life out of his existence whether he admits it or not....and to
many blinded AP's--whether he even KNOWS it or not. I wonder who a
poll would find is the real pathological gambler here..... Now stay
with the facts, little dicky. Don't get all nerved up because you
just read another set of truths that hurt.

> > Talk about denial. Go back and reread your last article that

you

> > posted on this forum. Don't you even understand what you are
> writing?
> > You made it very clear that you don't think the pay tables are
> > important. If that is the case, why would anyone believe the

pay

> > table selection is part of your strategy?
>
> Duh, Einstein is at it again. Your assuming again, and geeks

don't do

> that. So all you can come up with is that I LIED? about what pay
> tables I use? Read the strategy again and explain why that is.

Then come back with something remotely intelligent. Talk about never

> wanting to face reality. Imagine living with you??

LMAO. Your stumbling all over yourself, again. I think your first
word said it all, "Duh". We all know the truth in that. Now, do

what I said. Go back and read your post and see exactly what you said

about pay tables.

I don't need to--I don't care what the pay tables are. I can beat any
of them on any given day. I know it hurts you to read that, but tough
it out instead of crying to me. If you knew how to read you'd
understand that this is not my strategy. I play positive games maybe
5%-10% of the time--and only at the lower levels. But I can and
regularly have beaten any game with any pay table. I know you can't
figure that out, but geeks aren't supposed to be logical.

> > Since I usually win, I don't need your positive games anyway."
> >
> > Now what part of "I don't need your positive games" did I
> > misunderstand?
>
> Hello McFly? Do you ever get it right? BP is 25% of my strategy.
And how many times do I need to say I don't require positive games

to be winning like I do? But I do use them on occasion, as is when

they're available McFLY! HELLO!!! Anyone home in there??

Hey, it's your own words. Anyone can go back and check the post.

What part of "I don't need your positive games" did I misunderstand?
You are so nailed.

You've brought thickheadedness to a new level. Obviously I
don't 'need' positive games to win. But I prefer them just like
anyone else, because although I can win without them almost at will,
there's a slightly better chance when I use them. That's why it's a
part of my strategy, and playing only <99.3% games is not. Is that
too much for you to take in all in the same day? There's also a good
reason why FPDW or any of the NSUD games are not in my strategy, but
it has nothing to do with being positive or negative. Now I know that
puts your little pea brain into tilt, but tough that one out too and
you'll be proud of yourself for a change.

> So then explain to me, Mr. genius, why you've repeatedly said I
can't possibly win with my play strategy,

Lie. I've never said that.

I don't waste time looking over old posts like I get you to do all
the time, but you're dissing of my strategy and reported results was
the whole initial purpose of your wedgie over me.

Now, concentrate. Listen carefully, I'll

say it one more time. ... Your strategy (or any strategy) cannot

turn

a negative expectation game into a positive one. Now, got that?

And now listen to the truth: I don't care about that, and no one who
plays to win cares about that. Positive, negative, neutral, black or
white mean nothing until the session is over with and the results are
in. Expectation is for assumption-driven neurotics trying to build a
make-believe life.

If

not, go back and reread it again. It's really simple. Now, if you
want to play your strategy on positive machines, I have no problem.

Exactly the words I constantly ridicule all the time, and I enjoy
writing about it time and again (and my publisher enjoys it
too!). "Gee Rob, if you play negative games you can't win, and if you
play positive games you can". It's so hilarious I might throw up from
laughing!!

> and that I've lied all about the
> results.

I've said it is very possible that you've lied since you lie about
everything else.

With your selective criticizms and twisting of the truths, you've
never been able to identify one example where I've lied....and for
good reason--I never have. You like to SAY things are a lie, because
it makes you feel better about yourself and your debilitating family
habit. But you have nothing more than geek-speculation on yout side.
Go ahead. Give a concrete example and I'll show you where you're in
dreamland once again.

> Are you now saying you said that as another one of your
> assumptions WITHOUT understanding how I play?

I understand exactly how you play. Exactly like everyone else ...

one

hand at a time. The only thing that matters is the machine
expectation (hopefully positive) and how you play the hand (so it
stays positive).

This must mean that you're either losing it, or the wife is anxiously
pulling at you to go out and gamble.

> >
> > > and also claim I'm lying about my results of
> > > winning approx. 87% of the time as well as the overall

amount.

> >
> > Ho hum. Another lie. I've never said that. You should win over
80%
> of the time playing a 5 level progression. It's the amount you

lose

> that is subject for debate.
>
> I play a 6-level progression,

Is that so ... from

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/838

You stated,

"and because of the progression (in this case, $1/$2/$5/$10/$25)"

See where I said "In this case?" Go back and read my strategy again
and count the levels. You really do need to get your facts straight
before you type.

Sure sounds like a five level progression to me. In any event, the
number of progressions has no effect on the expectation. I really
don't care if you play 2 levels or 9 levels.

First it's important and then it isn't. How about unlimited levels
with an unlimited bankroll? Care then? So be careful AGAIN before you
type something you're assuming.

> The amount I lose is
> reported, but the debate is because of your jealousy about me.

You just don't WANT it to be that way, but guess what? The nerd comes

in 2hd place again, and in this case, 2nd place is LAST place.

Next time try adding in a fact or two in your idiotic response.

With

your own admission to playing a 5 level progression that I quoted

and

your attmept to deny it now, the only thing you've accomplished is
proving, once again, that you are a liar.

Thank you for confirming that you don't know what you're talking
about once again. That response is so jumbled that even your former
room full of IBM nerds couldn't decipher even a portion of it.

> > > Then,
> > > you seem to be on the bandwagon that wants me to accept a
> challenge to play something other than my strategy,
> >
> > Just above you stated that the paybck wasn't part of your
strategy,
> > now you're back saying it is. Do you get cross-eyed with this
flip
> > flopping?
>
> More confusion I see. Just re-read the strategy, and if you're
> courageous enough (and have the cash) to challenge me to a 50-
session
> play playing MY written strategy (you know, the one you don't
believe
> in and call me a liar and a fraud for) then let's do it!

Otherwise,

> you're just another loser weenie looking for a nut.

Like I said before, if you're willing to admit you play your

strategy on positive machines, then there is no debate. All the lies
you've been saying about winning on negative machines are simply
lies. I've accomplished exactly what I set out to accomplish.

Hmmmm..... I take that as you have read my strategy but don't want to
admit what it really is, because you have no formula to figure out
how I win on 5%-10% positive games and the rest negative. You know
and have always known how i play. all this nonsense that i play only
negative games is more of your fantasy about me. I am able to WIN on
negative games, but it is not my entire strategy. Get over it and say
a few prayers that might help you get over it.

Why would I be afraid. It's simply an admission on your part that
you've been lieing all along.

I think I put the strategy up on my site for everyone--even you--to
see in 2000. Seems to me that you're the one lying about how I play,
and it seems to be the only way you can put together a defense on why
you have this self-proclaimed ignorance about how I play.

> So how about it, big boy. Want to bet on my
> strategy, or you gonna keep living your fantasy of all negative
games
> forever?? Step up to the plate this time instead of flippity-
flopping
> away with your tail between your legs.

This is great. You're sitting there admitting to all your lies and
you don't even realize it.

Say what? Answer the question. If you're lost or afraid to bet, admit
it.

> >
> > > Finally, since it's now obvious to both of us that you DO get
it,
> > > you're trying to make a case that because I say I can beat a
> > negative
> > > game in any one session, that all 251 of my sessions were all
on
> > > negative games. Thus the question: "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK
> > IMPORTANT?"
> > > Answer: In any particular session, it is not.
> >
> > Yes, it is. It's just a matter of degrees. If someone plays
> negative
> > games once in a great while then it's clearly not a big deal.

If

> they
> > play them most of the time and think some progressive hocus

pocus

> is
> > going to make them a long term winner, then it IS a BIG DEAL.
>
> Blah blah blah.....As I said, it's a wonder that you [eople with
such
> twisted minds actually can live with yourselves.

Facts have always gotten a similar reply from you.

You mean "theories" don't you? Facts and you have nothing in common.

> >
> > > When a player plays for
> > > goals and sticks to those goals with a progression in denom.

&

> game
> > > volatility as well as incorporating holds that go for the
larger
> > > winners when the opportunity presents itself, the goals will
> either
> > > come or they won't--but most of the time they will come and

the

> > large
> > > winners will far outweigh the large losses.
> >
> > No. This is where you are confusing the Martingale

progressions'

> > ability to increase the number of session wins with the FACT

that

> it
> > cannot change the overall expectation. Sorry, the increase in
> > volatility will only lead to a wider spread in the bell curve,
but
> > that's it. In other words, there will be a few more people that
> come
> > home winners and few more that have diasterous losses. The
overall
> > payback remains the same. And, if they play with negative
> > expecatations, far more folks will lose than will win.
> >
> > > That's where you get
> > > stuck because you can't compute it without the understanding
you
> > > lack.

LMAO. You have admitted your strategy requires positive machines

and you won't wager anyone unless you can play them. Now, you come
back with statements like this. I love it.

Try loving the truth--and I know it's not easy for one who lives a
theoretical life: I've never said my strategy REQUIRES that I play
any positive games (remember the 5%-10% little dicky--get it yet?).
I've said too many times (and it documented on my site) that I LOOK
for them wherever I sit to play, and if the machine I sit at doesn't
have them I play anyway. Therefore, your wagering with me is
theoretically geek-safe for you. There'll be few if any positive
machines, and most of the play will be on negative games. Now I can't
POSSIBLY win with that scenario, can I little dicky? So are you ready
to step up to the plate or what? What's your escape clause this time??

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

>
> > of hours sometimes more. It called self control. If either my
wife
> or
> > > myself is not enjoying ourselves, we move on.
> >
> > Right...... So now do you feel better that you've talked

yourself

> > into it?
>
> Just the facts. Someday you will look in the mirror and realize
> you're the one with the problems.

Let's see....."self-control" as defined by a LV 'advantage player':
The ability to drive oneself to any and all casinos on a daily

basis

where rope-'em-in slot club deals await.

And make money doin' it. That's the difference between you and APs.
We know how to make money while you can only talk about it.

>
> You still can't accept that YOU are the one with the problem.

Since

> you know almost nothing about the people you call addicted, just
what does that mean? It means you are transferring your own

failures

on to others. Sorry, everyone here can it as clear as day. Your

rants

are worthless because we all know they are simply about yourself.

As I sit here not-so-fat, happy and successful from video poker

play,

and I have absolutely no desire to live in such a scum-ridden,

crime-

leading city as Las Vegas,

I didn't know they had completely eliminated crime in the Phoenix
area. This must be incredible news. I wonder when the news agencies
will catch up. LMAO.

I find myself debating the presence of a
gambling problem with someone who moved to LV just to feed his
addiction and be closer to the machines.

And, once again, you got lost.

While I couldn't care less
about being a stone's throw from a promotion or a 10/7 machine, my
opposition can only say he's there because of a "hobby" that sucks
the life out of his existence whether he admits it or not....and to
many blinded AP's--whether he even KNOWS it or not. I wonder who a
poll would find is the real pathological gambler here..... Now stay
with the facts, little dicky. Don't get all nerved up because you
just read another set of truths that hurt.

The only patholgical gambler is you. You still cannot accept the fact
that it is YOU that you are constantly berating. Your jealousy is so
obvious it flows off you in torrents. Gambling is only an addiction
if it controls your life. Clearly, it controls yours while it is only
a hobby to me. And, just so you understand this clearly. I can gamble
every single day and it is still only a hobby. You could gamble once
a month and it would still control your life. You can't go for a
single day without trying to pass off your afflication on others.
Look in the mirror and admit that you are still addicted and haven't
moved on. It's more than obvious to everyone else.

>
> > > Talk about denial. Go back and reread your last article that
you
> > > posted on this forum. Don't you even understand what you are
> > writing?
> > > You made it very clear that you don't think the pay tables

are

> > > important. If that is the case, why would anyone believe the
pay
> > > table selection is part of your strategy?
> >
> > Duh, Einstein is at it again. Your assuming again, and geeks
don't do
> > that. So all you can come up with is that I LIED? about what

pay

> > tables I use? Read the strategy again and explain why that is.
Then come back with something remotely intelligent. Talk about

never

> > wanting to face reality. Imagine living with you??
>
> LMAO. Your stumbling all over yourself, again. I think your first
> word said it all, "Duh". We all know the truth in that. Now, do
what I said. Go back and read your post and see exactly what you

said

> about pay tables.

I don't need to--I don't care what the pay tables are. I can beat

any

of them on any given day.

And, lose to any of them on a given day. When you have a point make
sure to raise your mouse.

I know it hurts you to read that,

Oh, ouch, ouch, ouch. PS. everyone here already knows that anyone can
win (or lose) on any given day. Did you think that was something
original? Are you really that stupid?

but tough
it out instead of crying to me. If you knew how to read you'd
understand that this is not my strategy. I play positive games

maybe

5%-10% of the time--and only at the lower levels. But I can and
regularly have beaten any game with any pay table. I know you can't
figure that out, but geeks aren't supposed to be logical.

Logic is the one thing you know nothing about. If you only play
positive machines 5-10% of the time at low levels then you should
have no problem going back to Cogno and taking his bet. It should be
a sure thing ... LMAO again.

>
> > > Since I usually win, I don't need your positive games anyway."
> > >
> > > Now what part of "I don't need your positive games" did I
> > > misunderstand?
> >
> > Hello McFly? Do you ever get it right? BP is 25% of my

strategy.

> And how many times do I need to say I don't require positive

games

to be winning like I do? But I do use them on occasion, as is when
> they're available McFLY! HELLO!!! Anyone home in there??
>
> Hey, it's your own words. Anyone can go back and check the post.
What part of "I don't need your positive games" did I

misunderstand?

You are so nailed.

You've brought thickheadedness to a new level. Obviously I
don't 'need' positive games to win.

Then take Cognos' bet. Otherwise we know this is just another lie.

But I prefer them just like
anyone else, because although I can win without them almost at

will,

Then take the bet.

there's a slightly better chance when I use them. That's why it's a
part of my strategy, and playing only <99.3% games is not.

And, you just said you didn't need them to win. So, take the bet.
This is hilarious ....

Is that
too much for you to take in all in the same day?

You have no idea. God, are you dense.

There's also a good
reason why FPDW or any of the NSUD games are not in my strategy,

but

it has nothing to do with being positive or negative. Now I know

that

puts your little pea brain into tilt, but tough that one out too

and

you'll be proud of yourself for a change.

I know, I know. They're too hard for you to spell.

>
> > So then explain to me, Mr. genius, why you've repeatedly said I
> can't possibly win with my play strategy,
>
> Lie. I've never said that.

I don't waste time looking over old posts like I get you to do all
the time, but you're dissing of my strategy and reported results

was

the whole initial purpose of your wedgie over me.

Of course you wouldn't. They continually show that you are a liar and
a fraud.

Now, concentrate. Listen carefully, I'll
> say it one more time. ... Your strategy (or any strategy) cannot
turn
> a negative expectation game into a positive one. Now, got that?

And now listen to the truth: I don't care about that, and no one

who

plays to win cares about that.

Everyone who plays cares about winning. Therefore, they care about
the expectation. You sound like you'd bet on tails when someone is
flipping a two-headed coin.

Positive, negative, neutral, black or
white mean nothing until the session is over with and the results

are

in. Expectation is for assumption-driven neurotics trying to build

a

make-believe life.

Then why didn't you take Cognos' bet? Why all this halabaloo about
having positive games in your strategy? You are, once again, trying
to talk out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.

If
> not, go back and reread it again. It's really simple. Now, if you
> want to play your strategy on positive machines, I have no

problem.

Exactly the words I constantly ridicule all the time, and I enjoy
writing about it time and again (and my publisher enjoys it
too!). "Gee Rob, if you play negative games you can't win, and if

you

play positive games you can". It's so hilarious I might throw up

from

laughing!!

Lie. The scammer is at it again. Are you related to Kevin Trudeau?

No AP says anything about a single session. In fact, we all know we
will lose most days even playing on positive machines. We also know
we will be further ahead than if we had played negative expectation
games, and, as each year comes to a close the vast majority of us
will have made money. Do you assert the vast majority of players
using your progressive system on (mostly) negative machines will be
ahead at the end of the year???

>
> > and that I've lied all about the
> > results.
>
> I've said it is very possible that you've lied since you lie

about

> everything else.

With your selective criticizms and twisting of the truths, you've
never been able to identify one example where I've lied....and for
good reason--I never have.

Lie. I've caught you soooooooo many times and gave references to
boot. In addition, using Aces_hii to post proves it again and again.
Are you senile or what?

You like to SAY things are a lie, because
it makes you feel better about yourself and your debilitating

family

habit.

No, I say it because it's true.

But you have nothing more than geek-speculation on yout side.
Go ahead. Give a concrete example and I'll show you where you're in
dreamland once again.

I just did, aces_hii. Oh, and what about that 5/6 level progression?
You stated you use 6 levels and not 5, and I showed you stating you
used a 5 level progression. This is soooooooooo easy.

>
> > Are you now saying you said that as another one of your
> > assumptions WITHOUT understanding how I play?
>
> I understand exactly how you play. Exactly like everyone else ...
one
> hand at a time. The only thing that matters is the machine
> expectation (hopefully positive) and how you play the hand (so it
> stays positive).

This must mean that you're either losing it, or the wife is

anxiously

pulling at you to go out and gamble.

This means I understand the simplest of truths about VP. It makes
scammers like you cringe because it takes all the air out of your
sails. If you disagree, describe how you play that is NOT "one hand
at a time".

>
> > >
> > > > and also claim I'm lying about my results of
> > > > winning approx. 87% of the time as well as the overall
amount.
> > >
> > > Ho hum. Another lie. I've never said that. You should win

over

> 80%
> > of the time playing a 5 level progression. It's the amount you
lose
> > that is subject for debate.
> >
> > I play a 6-level progression,
>
> Is that so ... from
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/838
>
> You stated,
>
> "and because of the progression (in this case, $1/$2/$5/$10/$25)"

See where I said "In this case?" Go back and read my strategy again
and count the levels. You really do need to get your facts straight
before you type.

Hey you either play 5 levels sometimes or you don't. You indicated
here that you did not and I just showed where you previously stated,
uncatagorically, that you did. This is what being caught in another
lie feels like. Get used to it.

>
> Sure sounds like a five level progression to me. In any event,

the

> number of progressions has no effect on the expectation. I really
> don't care if you play 2 levels or 9 levels.

First it's important and then it isn't.

Nope. It's only important in that it caught you in another lie.
Otherwise its' just Martingale all over again. More small wins, a few
large losses. It does nothing to change a negative expectation into a
positive one.

How about unlimited levels
with an unlimited bankroll?

There's no such thing. Shall we discuss the tooth fairy or Santa?

Care then? So be careful AGAIN before you
type something you're assuming.

Why should I care about impossible dreams. If you run into an
unlimited progression please let me know. Otherwise, take your baby
tooth out from under your pillow, mama's not going to help you here.

>
> > The amount I lose is
> > reported, but the debate is because of your jealousy about me.
You just don't WANT it to be that way, but guess what? The nerd

comes

> in 2hd place again, and in this case, 2nd place is LAST place.
>
> Next time try adding in a fact or two in your idiotic response.
With
> your own admission to playing a 5 level progression that I quoted
and
> your attmept to deny it now, the only thing you've accomplished

is

> proving, once again, that you are a liar.

Thank you for confirming that you don't know what you're talking
about once again. That response is so jumbled that even your former
room full of IBM nerds couldn't decipher even a portion of it.

Can't deny it can you? You've been caught in another lie and all you
can do is display your jealousy for all to see.

>
> > > > Then,
> > > > you seem to be on the bandwagon that wants me to accept a
> > challenge to play something other than my strategy,
> > >
> > > Just above you stated that the paybck wasn't part of your
> strategy,
> > > now you're back saying it is. Do you get cross-eyed with this
> flip
> > > flopping?
> >
> > More confusion I see. Just re-read the strategy, and if you're
> > courageous enough (and have the cash) to challenge me to a 50-
> session
> > play playing MY written strategy (you know, the one you don't
> believe
> > in and call me a liar and a fraud for) then let's do it!
Otherwise,
> > you're just another loser weenie looking for a nut.
>
> Like I said before, if you're willing to admit you play your
strategy on positive machines, then there is no debate. All the

lies

you've been saying about winning on negative machines are simply
lies. I've accomplished exactly what I set out to accomplish.

Hmmmm..... I take that as you have read my strategy

Nope. It still means nothing ... always will unless you find another
way to play VP. The rest of us will continue play one hand at a time
and understand what that means.

but don't want to
admit what it really is, because you have no formula to figure out
how I win on 5%-10% positive games and the rest negative.

There is no formula. This is your typical scam response. Claim you've
won (with no proof) when challenged. Sorry, monkey boy, but we've
seen this BS all too often. It means ABSOLUTELY nothing.

You know
and have always known how i play. all this nonsense that i play

only

negative games is more of your fantasy about me. I am able to WIN

on

negative games, but it is not my entire strategy. Get over it and

say

a few prayers that might help you get over it.
>
> Why would I be afraid. It's simply an admission on your part that
> you've been lieing all along.

I think I put the strategy up on my site for everyone--even you--to
see in 2000. Seems to me that you're the one lying about how I play,

Nope. I go by what you say on this forum. I've already quoted you
several times stating the payback doesn't matter. Either you're
lieing on your website or you've been lieing here. Take your pick.

and it seems to be the only way you can put together a defense on

why

you have this self-proclaimed ignorance about how I play.

I need no defense. So, what is it? Does the payback matter?

>
> > So how about it, big boy. Want to bet on my
> > strategy, or you gonna keep living your fantasy of all negative
> games
> > forever?? Step up to the plate this time instead of flippity-
> flopping
> > away with your tail between your legs.
>
> This is great. You're sitting there admitting to all your lies

and

> you don't even realize it.

Say what? Answer the question. If you're lost or afraid to bet,

admit

it.

LMAO. Mr. flip-flop has no clue.

>
> > >
> > > > Finally, since it's now obvious to both of us that you DO

get

> it,
> > > > you're trying to make a case that because I say I can beat

a

> > > negative
> > > > game in any one session, that all 251 of my sessions were

all

> on
> > > > negative games. Thus the question: "IS THE MACHINE PAYBACK
> > > IMPORTANT?"
> > > > Answer: In any particular session, it is not.
> > >
> > > Yes, it is. It's just a matter of degrees. If someone plays
> > negative
> > > games once in a great while then it's clearly not a big deal.
If
> > they
> > > play them most of the time and think some progressive hocus
pocus
> > is
> > > going to make them a long term winner, then it IS a BIG DEAL.
> >
> > Blah blah blah.....As I said, it's a wonder that you [eople

with

> such
> > twisted minds actually can live with yourselves.
>
> Facts have always gotten a similar reply from you.

You mean "theories" don't you? Facts and you have nothing in common.

Nope. I mean facts. The same facts that prove your system is a scam
and you are a liar and a fraud.

>
> > >
> > > > When a player plays for
> > > > goals and sticks to those goals with a progression in

denom.

&
> > game
> > > > volatility as well as incorporating holds that go for the
> larger
> > > > winners when the opportunity presents itself, the goals

will

> > either
> > > > come or they won't--but most of the time they will come and
the
> > > large
> > > > winners will far outweigh the large losses.
> > >
> > > No. This is where you are confusing the Martingale
progressions'
> > > ability to increase the number of session wins with the FACT
that
> > it
> > > cannot change the overall expectation. Sorry, the increase in
> > > volatility will only lead to a wider spread in the bell

curve,

> but
> > > that's it. In other words, there will be a few more people

that

> > come
> > > home winners and few more that have diasterous losses. The
> overall
> > > payback remains the same. And, if they play with negative
> > > expecatations, far more folks will lose than will win.
> > >
> > > > That's where you get
> > > > stuck because you can't compute it without the

understanding

> you
> > > > lack.
>
> LMAO. You have admitted your strategy requires positive machines
and you won't wager anyone unless you can play them. Now, you come
back with statements like this. I love it.

Try loving the truth--

I do.

and I know it's not easy for one who lives a
theoretical life:

No theory involved. Simple mathematical fact.

I've never said my strategy REQUIRES that I play
any positive games (remember the 5%-10% little dicky--get it yet?).

Then take Cognos' bet. That's the ONLY way you can prove it.

I've said too many times (and it documented on my site) that I LOOK
for them wherever I sit to play, and if the machine I sit at

doesn't

have them I play anyway.

That's not what you've said on this forum. So, I guess that means
you've been lieing all along.

Therefore, your wagering with me is
theoretically geek-safe for you. There'll be few if any positive
machines, and most of the play will be on negative games. Now I

can't

POSSIBLY win with that scenario, can I little dicky? So are you

ready

to step up to the plate or what? What's your escape clause this

time??

I don't need one. You have been caught in a lie. What more do I need?
You are a fraud. You've claimed that payback doesn't matter and now
you claim it does. You are simply the stupidest person I have ever
come across.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > Common amongst whom....NERDS!!!?!
>
> The human race. At least those of us who have been out of prison
and in touch with the rest of society.

How long you been out of prison?

My entire life. How long have you been out of prison?

>
> > Ooops! Looks like damage control once again! You know I've got
your
> > number and it makes you sore. And sorry. You're an Internet

geek

> who
> > makes believe he's had and has a life as you stroll thru
websites,
> > when all you are is another video poker addict who's been
> bamboozled
> > by his (and her apparently) habit into moving to LV just to be
> closer
> > to the machines and the locals joints that people like you go
gaga
> > over. And YOU have self-confidence? HAHAHAHA!!!! You wouldn't
know
> > what to do without a casino nearby! I'd say "get a life" but

it's

> all
> > passsed you by so very long ago.....
>
> LMAO. Talking about yourself again monkey boy? It's so obvious to
the rest of us and you are so blinded by your own ego that you

can't

see it.

Doesn't take much of an ego to see that you moved to LV out of an
addiction, to go along with those four sweaty hands.

No, it only takes a scammer trying to sell his wares. Your pathetic
attempts to play the addiction card have been nailed. You are the one
with the addiction that you've NEVER recovered from.

>
> Nope. The only one you keep GETTING to is yourself. Each and

every

> one of your posts shows just how stupid you are.

Then I LOVE to be stupid

Clearly.

> > Maybe I'll get some of my prison buddies to
> > pay you a visit and spank you for mistreating your wife
(physically
> > AND emotionally that is) and I'll also have them help you kick
the
> > nasty vp habit. Now how about responding with something other
than
> > the same old BS!
>
> You're the one with the BS. All my responses are reasonable. I

mean

> anyone who would even comtemplate asking "Have you stopped

beating

> your wife?" is so totally out of touch with reality that it's
> unbelieveable. And, then you start claiming that you've gotten to
me is even more evidence that YOU have been nailed ...again.

Here's some help, and I'll offer it up for free since you both are
gambling addictts that need every spare penny to throw into the
machines on your DAILY trots: You can do one of your famous looking
up on the Internet for statistics if it makes you feel better, but
the common, normal person knows that LV is home to more domestic
violence than any other major city. Why? Yup--Because of the
gambling.

Until you provide some references I can just assume you made this up.
One more attempt to hide your scam behind pathetic assertions.

Just by your irritability with me and the fact that I win
so often and so much,

And with the help of your inheritance. LMAO.

I can see why it affects you at home.

No you can't. You don't have a clue. As much as you would like (just
one of) your assertions to be true, the fact is, you've been wrong
EVERY time. Now, go try out for that next fedex commercial. Maybe
they'll give you French benefits.

Don't
fret though. You're in the same predicament as all the other gold
diggers who came to town thinking they could make withdrawals as

easy

as 1-2-3....

My current position is ... ahead about $100K in less than two years.
And, that's only part time (you seemed to have forgotten that I'm
only here 1/2 the year). Not a bad "predicament".

just like Yuri the "EXPERT" vp player. In fact, VPFree's
got a bundle of them who blab incessantly about "the upcoming move"
and how they just can't wait, then all you see for a few months

after

the arrival is post after post after post about their prowess, the
freebies they get, and a hoard of frivilous questions because

they're

all pumped up about being a fantasy player that's on their way
to "being like Mike".

More assertions, no supporting evidence. Do you really think anyone
believes these idiotic assertions? Tell you what. Name a few APs who
have failed, give me their email addresses so I can verify they
exist. After that I will post what they had to say. Oh, and don't
bother with underbankrolled players who have no idea what a penalty
card looks like. They are not APs.

But then guess what happens. Righto! There's a
silence only a machine shop factory foreman could love. To those of
us not affected by that disease all you so-called "AP's" tote

around

with you, it's as predictable as a sunny day in the desert.

Your assertions are getting all too predictable. As for you providing
any supporting evidence ... the lack of it is just as predictable.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

> Let's see....."self-control" as defined by a LV 'advantage

player': The ability to drive oneself to any and all casinos on a
daily basis where rope-'em-in slot club deals await.

And make money doin' it. That's the difference between you and APs.
We know how to make money while you can only talk about it.

You know what's dumb about your fantasy? You AP's think you're doing
everything under the casino radar, when in fact by your own addiction
to slot club cards, you're every move at the machines and slot clubs
is being recorded, analyzed, and acted upon. I have several very
close contacts within that specific part of the industry as you may
know, such as at the Palms, Wynn, TI, and one of the Fiestas. I
regularly talk to these people about the big heads, the geeks, the
math professors who came to town to conquer the machines, and some of
the famous names. And guess what? It's the same answer all the
time: "The advantage players like to think we don't know who they
are, but their play habits are the easiest to track of all players.
If ANY of these people at ANY level -- esp. the ones who publicize
their victories time and again in the media -- were beating us over
time, they'd be tossed. We throw out BJ counters even before they
play a hand--so anyone who doesn't believe we'd do the same to a
video poker player with a true advantage who is winning, is nuts". I
understand that, it makes perfect sense to me, and you don't want to
get it because you want to perpetuate this nonsense about how AP's
win win win in order to talk yourself into justifying why you play
far more than you should. It's the same disease you all have, and I'm
more than happy to expose it publicly as often as possible. You claim
I have some sort of a scam going, when it's really you and the rest
of your addict peers who are consistently being caught acting out
your fantasy scam over and over again. Can life be any sweeter to me
or what.......

> As I sit here not-so-fat, happy and successful from video poker
play, and I have absolutely no desire to live in such a scum-

ridden, crime-leading city as Las Vegas,

I didn't know they had completely eliminated crime in the Phoenix
area. This must be incredible news. I wonder when the news agencies
will catch up. LMAO.

I think Phx. is a wee bit larger than LV, and the crime rate is far
less. You're good at one thing--looking up what you don't know. Check
the stats on crime, domestic violence, rape, indigence, social
problems, DWI arrests, and even # of junk cars on the streets. You'll
find the beautiful city of LV at or near the top of every category.

> I find myself debating the presence of a
> gambling problem with someone who moved to LV just to feed his
> addiction and be closer to the machines.

And, once again, you got lost.

Face it. You moved to LV for the same reason misscraps, Jean Scott,
Bob Dancer, and at least 40 others I've talked to in the past year
did--TO BE CLOSER TO THE VP MACHINES! And that translates into only
one thing--TO BE ABLE TO FEED YOUR UGLY HABITS MORE OFTEN!

> While I couldn't care less
> about being a stone's throw from a promotion or a 10/7 machine,

my

> opposition can only say he's there because of a "hobby" that

sucks

> the life out of his existence whether he admits it or not....and

to

> many blinded AP's--whether he even KNOWS it or not. I wonder who

a

> poll would find is the real pathological gambler here..... Now

stay

> with the facts, little dicky. Don't get all nerved up because you
> just read another set of truths that hurt.

The only patholgical gambler is you. You still cannot accept the

fact that it is YOU that you are constantly berating. Your jealousy
is so obvious it flows off you in torrents. Gambling is only an
addiction if it controls your life. Clearly, it controls yours while
it is only a hobby to me. And, just so you understand this clearly. I
can gamble every single day and it is still only a hobby. You could
gamble once a month and it would still control your life. You can't
go for a single day without trying to pass off your afflication on
others. Look in the mirror and admit that you are still addicted and
haven't moved on. It's more than obvious to everyone else.

A clar rant of denial if there ever was one. Blaming others as you
did your wife when all fingers point to you. Now it's me and not
little dicky. I feel sorry for you and the ones whom you've also
brought down with your sickness.

> I don't need to--I don't care what the pay tables are. I can beat
any of them on any given day.

And, lose to any of them on a given day. When you have a point make
sure to raise your mouse.

Except for the facts you won't accept--87% and +$645k. Mostly on
negative machines. Now give me some more of that 'ouch ouch ouch'!

> but tough
> it out instead of crying to me. If you knew how to read you'd
> understand that this is not my strategy. I play positive games
maybe
> 5%-10% of the time--and only at the lower levels. But I can and
> regularly have beaten any game with any pay table. I know you

can't figure that out, but geeks aren't supposed to be logical.

Logic is the one thing you know nothing about. If you only play
positive machines 5-10% of the time at low levels then you should
have no problem going back to Cogno and taking his bet. It should

be a sure thing ... LMAO again.

Hello again McFLY!! 50 sessions on other than my strategy for a loser
like him (or you)? Unlike you bozos, I play for a living and it's not
a pathological gambling feed. I'll be happy to play one session for
you idiots on >99.3% machines--heck, I'll even play the whole thing
on 6/5 BP and 8/5 DDB if you wish. I'll still win and you know it!

> You've brought thickheadedness to a new level. Obviously I
> don't 'need' positive games to win.

Then take Cognos' bet. Otherwise we know this is just another lie.
> there's a slightly better chance when I use them. That's why it's

a

> part of my strategy, and playing only <99.3% games is not.

And, you just said you didn't need them to win. So, take the bet.
This is hilarious ....

I don't, and because I'm famous for developing a strategy that wins
more than anyone else's and you envy/hate me for it, why are you
afraid to challenge me to play MY strategy for $350k?? I don't care
about someone else's rendition of a strategy. If you bet me $350k
that I'd be behind after 50 sessions of 25c FPDW after I've learned
it perfectly, I still wouldn't bet it because it's not my strategy.
How thick are you? There's plenty of negative games in there, is
there not? Is 5% positive just to rich for your blood!?

Everyone who plays cares about winning. Therefore, they care about
the expectation. You sound like you'd bet on tails when someone is
flipping a two-headed coin.

Only you would be dumb enough--probably by genes and not from lack of
education--to say something so stupid repeatedly.

> Positive, negative, neutral, black or
> white mean nothing until the session is over with and the results
are
> in. Expectation is for assumption-driven neurotics trying to

build

a
> make-believe life.

Then why didn't you take Cognos' bet? Why all this halabaloo about
having positive games in your strategy? You are, once again, trying
to talk out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.

Let's see.....90% negative and 10% positive....and you're both afraid
to bet me yet you constantly say like the nerd that you are, that I
can't possibly win on mostly negative games. I'm talking out of both
sides of my mouth because I play a few pos. along with mostly neg.
games, yet you fear me. Sounds like you've got a mouthful of marbles
when it comes time for clear explanations.

Lie. The scammer is at it again. Are you related to Kevin Trudeau?

Who's that?

No AP says anything about a single session. In fact, we all know we
will lose most days even playing on positive machines. We also know
we will be further ahead than if we had played negative expectation
games, and, as each year comes to a close the vast majority of us
will have made money. Do you assert the vast majority of players
using your progressive system on (mostly) negative machines will be
ahead at the end of the year???

Boy, are you a misled individual. Where do you come up with such
stories? That's the typical type that gets locked up with other geeks
to come up with useless patents that the company gets all the
recognition and benefits for.

I don't assert anyone but me will be ahead playing my strategy (yeah--
you got it right this time with the "mostly negative machines") at
the end of a year. Why? Because a big part of it has to do with
mental make up. I have incredible discipline to go with an iron-clad
determination to always do what I say I'm going to do. And I saved a
gambling-only bankroll years ago. I really don't know of anyone else
like me in those respects. You and your AP buddies, on the other
hand, are the epitome of illogic when it comes to gambling. You have
little respect for yourselves as you tramp from casino to casino all
the time, you have no discipline when it comes to whether to quit and
enjoy the money or keep on playing for the points and the teeny weeny
percentage that awaits as you step into your graves, you have no
ability to just pass by a machine as it beckons you, and you've
totally lost touch with reality and other more important aspects in
life.

Lie. I've caught you soooooooo many times and gave references to
boot. In addition, using Aces_hii to post proves it again and

again. Are you senile or what?

Examples, or you're just the same as you've always been--a sour
person who uses name-calling without proof. aces_hii?? I didn't know
we all had to put our names in our e-mail addresses! Maybe you ought
to talk to Bill Gates about that if it bothers you.......

> But you have nothing more than geek-speculation on yout side.
> Go ahead. Give a concrete example and I'll show you where you're

in

> dreamland once again.

I just did, aces_hii. Oh, and what about that 5/6 level

progression?

You stated you use 6 levels and not 5, and I showed you stating you
used a 5 level progression. This is soooooooooo easy.

Read the strategy again. How dumb can you be?

> This must mean that you're either losing it, or the wife is
anxiously
> pulling at you to go out and gamble.

This means I understand the simplest of truths about VP. It makes
scammers like you cringe because it takes all the air out of your
sails. If you disagree, describe how you play that is NOT "one hand
at a time".

But....it IS one hand at a time little dicky! Where did you get that
air in your sails that says it's not??

> > > I play a 6-level progression,
> >
> > Is that so ... from
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/838
> >
> > You stated,
> >
> > "and because of the progression (in this case, $1/$2/$5/$10/

$25)"

>
> See where I said "In this case?" Go back and read my strategy

again

> and count the levels. You really do need to get your facts

straight

> before you type.

Hey you either play 5 levels sometimes or you don't. You indicated
here that you did not and I just showed where you previously

stated,

uncatagorically, that you did. This is what being caught in another
lie feels like. Get used to it.

Read the strategy again, little dicky, and stop trying to make
yourself feel good about making a mistake and being caught at it. For
assistance, the rule states that I have the OPTION of playing up to
$25 only if the amount of my profiting in the previous weeks is
sufficient to do so. You beginning to see what a video poker
addiction has done to your mind yet??

> > Sure sounds like a five level progression to me. In any event,
the
> > number of progressions has no effect on the expectation. I

really

> > don't care if you play 2 levels or 9 levels.
>
> First it's important and then it isn't.
> How about unlimited levels
> with an unlimited bankroll?

There's no such thing. Shall we discuss the tooth fairy or Santa?

You're the fool that's into theory, remember?? Kinda stings when you
get whacked in the but with the tight end of a towel, doesn't it!

> Care then? So be careful AGAIN before you
> type something you're assuming.

Why should I care about impossible dreams. If you run into an
unlimited progression please let me know. Otherwise, take your baby
tooth out from under your pillow, mama's not going to help you here.

Why? Because you're entire life is a fantasy, and of all people an
idiot like you ought to be able to comprenend anything.

> >
> > > The amount I lose is
> > > reported, but the debate is because of your jealousy about

me.

> You just don't WANT it to be that way, but guess what? The nerd
comes
> > in 2hd place again, and in this case, 2nd place is LAST place.
> >
> > Next time try adding in a fact or two in your idiotic response.
> With
> > your own admission to playing a 5 level progression that I

quoted

> and
> > your attmept to deny it now, the only thing you've accomplished
is
> > proving, once again, that you are a liar.
>
> Thank you for confirming that you don't know what you're talking
> about once again. That response is so jumbled that even your

former

> room full of IBM nerds couldn't decipher even a portion of it.

Can't deny it can you? You've been caught in another lie and all

you

can do is display your jealousy for all to see.

> Therefore, your wagering with me is
> theoretically geek-safe for you. There'll be few if any positive
> machines, and most of the play will be on negative games. Now I
can't
> POSSIBLY win with that scenario, can I little dicky? So are you
ready
> to step up to the plate or what? What's your escape clause this
time??

I don't need one. You have been caught in a lie. What more do I

need?

You are a fraud. You've claimed that payback doesn't matter and now
you claim it does. You are simply the stupidest person I have ever
come across.

Skip the nonsense of your face-saving over and over again. Let's get
to the meat of it. Are you going to accept betting me on 50 sessions
of my strategy or not? If not, why not? Are you afraid of me or what?
Answer all the questions.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

> >
> > LMAO. Talking about yourself again monkey boy? It's so obvious

to

> the rest of us and you are so blinded by your own ego that you
can't
> see it.
>
> Doesn't take much of an ego to see that you moved to LV out of an
> addiction, to go along with those four sweaty hands.

No, it only takes a scammer trying to sell his wares. Your pathetic
attempts to play the addiction card have been nailed. You are the

one

with the addiction that you've NEVER recovered from.

Avoiding the point? another telltale sign of an addicted gambler
who's in denial.

> > Nope. The only one you keep GETTING to is yourself. Each and
every
> > one of your posts shows just how stupid you are.
>
> Then I LOVE to be stupid

Clearly.

VERY clearly. Getting to you is worth every drop of whatever you want
me to be!

> Here's some help, and I'll offer it up for free since you both

are

> gambling addicts that need every spare penny to throw into the
> machines on your DAILY trots: You can do one of your famous

looking

> up on the Internet for statistics if it makes you feel better,

but

> the common, normal person knows that LV is home to more domestic
> violence than any other major city. Why? Yup--Because of the
> gambling.

Until you provide some references I can just assume you made this

up.

One more attempt to hide your scam behind pathetic assertions.

Per your usual MO, when you know it's true you won't look up the
stats.

> Just by your irritability with me and the fact that I win
> so often and so much,

And with the help of your inheritance. LMAO.

Yup--Currently at $645k (and growing) plus $210k. Lots to laugh
about, in fact, I do it every time I get ready to take a trip to
Nevada.

> I can see why it affects you at home.

No you can't. You don't have a clue. As much as you would like

(just

one of) your assertions to be true, the fact is, you've been wrong
EVERY time. Now, go try out for that next fedex commercial. Maybe
they'll give you French benefits.

Yes I can. It's written all over you and others like you.
Have you got this thing about Fed-X and the guy you call Trudeau or
what?? Is that the French reference? Maybe you should have visited
France in your lifetime--or, OK, I get it! You've been to Paris hotel
& casino, so THAT makes it that you've BEEN to France! Wow--did I get
duped!!

> Don't
> fret though. You're in the same predicament as all the other gold
> diggers who came to town thinking they could make withdrawals as
easy
> as 1-2-3....

My current position is ... ahead about $100K in less than two

years.

And, that's only part time (you seemed to have forgotten that I'm
only here 1/2 the year). Not a bad "predicament".

And my chicken laid 400 eggs this morning in half the time the one
next to her did. OK, if you're telling the truth, tell me where you
play, where you've been winning, and if I have a contact at the place
(and I do pay some people for info) I'll check it out. If you're
being honest, then I'll post a retraction about my views on AP's.
What have you got to lose? So let's have it--isn't it worth it? Don't
come on with some nebulous excuse as to why you can't do it. Just the
facts. Send me a private e-mail with the name you use as a player and
the casino info with the amount you say you've won there. I'll either
verify it or say I can't. Just for the most recent period. Let's do
it!

> just like Yuri the "EXPERT" vp player. In fact, VPFree's
> got a bundle of them who blab incessantly about "the upcoming

move"

> and how they just can't wait, then all you see for a few months
after
> the arrival is post after post after post about their prowess,

the

> freebies they get, and a hoard of frivilous questions because
they're
> all pumped up about being a fantasy player that's on their way
> to "being like Mike".

More assertions, no supporting evidence. Do you really think anyone
believes these idiotic assertions? Tell you what. Name a few APs

who

have failed, give me their email addresses so I can verify they
exist. After that I will post what they had to say. Oh, and don't
bother with underbankrolled players who have no idea what a penalty
card looks like. They are not APs.

VPFree has all the past info on this loser Yuri S. That's one prime
example from the top. Jean Scott supported his public humiliation of
being a loser who lost it all, and I can guess where the sympathy
came from. Now how about YOU provoding me with the PROOF, not
assertions, that even ONE AP is ahead from playing their stupid
method.

> But then guess what happens. Righto! There's a
> silence only a machine shop factory foreman could love. To those

of

> us not affected by that disease all you so-called "AP's" tote
around
> with you, it's as predictable as a sunny day in the desert.

Your assertions are getting all too predictable. As for you

providing

any supporting evidence ... the lack of it is just as predictable.

What else but more denial could anyone expect from someone who has
such a life?

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > Let's see....."self-control" as defined by a LV 'advantage
player': The ability to drive oneself to any and all casinos on a
daily basis where rope-'em-in slot club deals await.
>
> And make money doin' it. That's the difference between you and

APs.

> We know how to make money while you can only talk about it.

You know what's dumb about your fantasy? You AP's think you're

doing

everything under the casino radar, when in fact by your own

addiction

to slot club cards, you're every move at the machines and slot

clubs

is being recorded, analyzed, and acted upon.

Sure they are. I'm sure the casinos spend millions of dollars
following every move of the .25 APs. Are you for real?

I have several very
close contacts within that specific part of the industry as you may
know, such as at the Palms, Wynn, TI, and one of the Fiestas.

Sure you do ... And, I bet they risk their jobs passing confidential
information just to you. What planet are you from?

I
regularly talk to these people about the big heads, the geeks, the
math professors who came to town to conquer the machines, and some

of

the famous names.

Sure you do ...

And guess what? It's the same answer all the
time: "The advantage players like to think we don't know who they
are, but their play habits are the easiest to track of all players.

Easy to track. But of no interest. That's the catch and I've told you
this many times already. They are not interested in the small fish.
So, if you think you're providing some scary revelation, think again.

If ANY of these people at ANY level -- esp. the ones who publicize
their victories time and again in the media -- were beating us over
time, they'd be tossed. We

We?

throw out BJ counters even before they
play a hand--so anyone who doesn't believe we'd do the same to a
video poker player with a true advantage who is winning, is nuts".

Yes, you are nuts. That's already been verified.

I
understand that, it makes perfect sense to me, and you don't want

to

get it because you want to perpetuate this nonsense about how AP's
win win win in order to talk yourself into justifying why you play
far more than you should.

Yada, yada, yada. So little time ... so much BS.

It's the same disease you all have, and I'm
more than happy to expose it publicly as often as possible.

I see, you're now admitting that you help out the casinos whenever
possible. Why don't you print that in your next column. Better yet,
maybe someone else with a column might decide to quote you and your
collusion with the casinos.

You claim
I have some sort of a scam going,

Yep. Your idiotic scam system ... and now, with your own admission to
helping out the casinos whenever possible, it may come tumbling down.

when it's really you and the rest
of your addict peers who are consistently being caught acting out
your fantasy scam over and over again. Can life be any sweeter to

me

or what.......

If looking like an idiot is "sweet" for you, so be it.

>
> > As I sit here not-so-fat, happy and successful from video poker
> play, and I have absolutely no desire to live in such a scum-
ridden, crime-leading city as Las Vegas,
>
> I didn't know they had completely eliminated crime in the Phoenix
> area. This must be incredible news. I wonder when the news

agencies

> will catch up. LMAO.

I think Phx. is a wee bit larger than LV, and the crime rate is far
less. You're good at one thing--looking up what you don't know.

Check

the stats on crime, domestic violence, rape, indigence, social
problems, DWI arrests, and even # of junk cars on the streets.

You'll

find the beautiful city of LV at or near the top of every category.
>
> > I find myself debating the presence of a
> > gambling problem with someone who moved to LV just to feed his
> > addiction and be closer to the machines.
>
> And, once again, you got lost.

Face it. You moved to LV for the same reason misscraps, Jean Scott,
Bob Dancer, and at least 40 others I've talked to in the past year
did--TO BE CLOSER TO THE VP MACHINES! And that translates into only
one thing--TO BE ABLE TO FEED YOUR UGLY HABITS MORE OFTEN!

Wrong again oh great swami. I moved to LV to get away from snow and
cold in the winter. Are you always wrong?

>
> > While I couldn't care less
> > about being a stone's throw from a promotion or a 10/7 machine,
my
> > opposition can only say he's there because of a "hobby" that
sucks
> > the life out of his existence whether he admits it or

not....and

to
> > many blinded AP's--whether he even KNOWS it or not. I wonder

who

a
> > poll would find is the real pathological gambler here..... Now
stay
> > with the facts, little dicky. Don't get all nerved up because

you

> > just read another set of truths that hurt.
>
> The only patholgical gambler is you. You still cannot accept the
fact that it is YOU that you are constantly berating. Your jealousy
is so obvious it flows off you in torrents. Gambling is only an
addiction if it controls your life. Clearly, it controls yours

while

it is only a hobby to me. And, just so you understand this clearly.

I

can gamble every single day and it is still only a hobby. You could
gamble once a month and it would still control your life. You can't
go for a single day without trying to pass off your afflication on
others. Look in the mirror and admit that you are still addicted

and

haven't moved on. It's more than obvious to everyone else.

A clar rant of denial if there ever was one.

Just the facts, mac.

Blaming others as you
did your wife when all fingers point to you.

Lie. I never blamed my wife for anything. That was you, moron. Can't
you even keep the facts straight? Are you really so blinded by your
ego that you can't overcome the need to berate others who don't share
your addiction? You need help.

Now it's me and not
little dicky. I feel sorry for you and the ones whom you've also
brought down with your sickness.

Of course, you know it's you. Have you ever looked up the definition
of addiction? Do you have any idea what it entails? I didn't think
so. You are so deep into your own BS that you can't see the obvious
truth ... so I'll help you out. See:

http://www.addictionrecov.org/sixtypes.htm

Under this set of deinitions I am number 4), a serious social
gambler. You on the other hand show all the aspects of number 6).
Especially, note the comment about lying. Finally, note that for
someone to qualify as addicted, there must be detrimental effects,
losing and chasing losses. None of those apply to successful APs. All
this proves is your constant references to addiction are only a
reflection on your own problems. Also:

http://www.calproblemgambling.org/gambling.html

States that "there are distortions in thinking ... These include
denial, fixed beliefs, superstition and other kinds of magical
thinking, and notably omnipotence"

Denial - Your constant need to call everyone else addicted.
Fixed beliefs - No one else can win.
Magical thinking - Your hocus pocus progressive system.
Omnipotence - This is pretty obvious.

Ring a bell? You need help.

>
> > I don't need to--I don't care what the pay tables are. I can

beat

> any of them on any given day.
>
> And, lose to any of them on a given day. When you have a point

make

> sure to raise your mouse.

Except for the facts you won't accept--87% and +$645k. Mostly on
negative machines.

No one cares. Too bad your monsterous ego won't accept that FACT.

>
> > but tough
> > it out instead of crying to me. If you knew how to read you'd
> > understand that this is not my strategy. I play positive games
> maybe
> > 5%-10% of the time--and only at the lower levels. But I can and
> > regularly have beaten any game with any pay table. I know you
can't figure that out, but geeks aren't supposed to be logical.
>
> Logic is the one thing you know nothing about. If you only play
> positive machines 5-10% of the time at low levels then you should
> have no problem going back to Cogno and taking his bet. It should
be a sure thing ... LMAO again.

Hello again McFLY!! 50 sessions on other than my strategy for a

loser

like him (or you)?

In other words, you won't back up your words with actions. Of course,
we already knew that.

Unlike you bozos, I play for a living and it's not
a pathological gambling feed.

Of course no ....

I'll be happy to play one session for
you idiots on >99.3% machines--heck, I'll even play the whole thing
on 6/5 BP and 8/5 DDB if you wish. I'll still win and you know it!

The bet is the bet. Either accept it as Cogno offered or quit whining
and looking like a fool. If you REALLY thought you could win you'd
have accepted the bet immediately. What's even more fun is you keep
bringing it up so I can stick it to you again and again.

>
> > You've brought thickheadedness to a new level. Obviously I
> > don't 'need' positive games to win.
>
> Then take Cognos' bet. Otherwise we know this is just another lie.
> > there's a slightly better chance when I use them. That's why

it's

a
> > part of my strategy, and playing only <99.3% games is not.
>
> And, you just said you didn't need them to win. So, take the bet.
> This is hilarious ....

I don't,

LMAO. Wah wah wah. Quit crying and admit your system and YOU are
frauds.

and because I'm famous for developing a strategy that wins
more than anyone else's

I think Martingale beat you by a long shot.

and you envy/hate me for it, why are you
afraid to challenge me to play MY strategy for $350k??

Because anyone can win playing positive games. Why are you so scared
to play your strategy on 99.2% games when you've said for years that
the pay table doesn't matter?

I don't care
about someone else's rendition of a strategy. If you bet me $350k
that I'd be behind after 50 sessions of 25c FPDW after I've learned
it perfectly, I still wouldn't bet it because it's not my strategy.

Still trying to worm your way out of the predicament you got yourself
into by running from Cognos' bet? Too late. You've shown your true
colors and they have a lot of yellow in them.

How thick are you? There's plenty of negative games in there, is
there not? Is 5% positive just to rich for your blood!?

You had your chance. Your feeble attempts here are of no use. You and
your system has been shown to be scams.

>
> Everyone who plays cares about winning. Therefore, they care

about

> the expectation. You sound like you'd bet on tails when someone

is

> flipping a two-headed coin.

Only you would be dumb enough--probably by genes and not from lack

of

education--to say something so stupid repeatedly.

You shouldn't denigrate your own parents like this.

>
> > Positive, negative, neutral, black or
> > white mean nothing until the session is over with and the

results

> are
> > in. Expectation is for assumption-driven neurotics trying to
build
> a
> > make-believe life.
>
> Then why didn't you take Cognos' bet? Why all this halabaloo

about

> having positive games in your strategy? You are, once again,

trying

> to talk out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.

Let's see.....90% negative and 10% positive....and you're both

afraid

to bet me yet you constantly say like the nerd that you are, that I
can't possibly win on mostly negative games. I'm talking out of

both

sides of my mouth because I play a few pos. along with mostly neg.
games, yet you fear me. Sounds like you've got a mouthful of

marbles

when it comes time for clear explanations.

It's really quite simple, moron. If you really believe you could win
on negative games you would have taken the bet. Now your trying to
save face and it just doesn't cut it.

>
> Lie. The scammer is at it again. Are you related to Kevin

Trudeau?

Who's that?

Another scammer, only a more successful one. Did you meet him in
prison?

>
> No AP says anything about a single session. In fact, we all know

we

> will lose most days even playing on positive machines. We also

know

> we will be further ahead than if we had played negative

expectation

> games, and, as each year comes to a close the vast majority of us
> will have made money. Do you assert the vast majority of players
> using your progressive system on (mostly) negative machines will

be

> ahead at the end of the year???

Boy, are you a misled individual. Where do you come up with such
stories?

The truth hurts, doesn't it. All one has to do is listen to ANYONE
but you.

I don't assert anyone but me will be ahead playing my strategy

Of course not, it's a scam. You just don't happen to mention that the
majority of players will be losers if they try your system.

(yeah--

you got it right this time with the "mostly negative machines") at
the end of a year. Why? Because a big part of it has to do with
mental make up.

Do you put that on with a brush or a pad? ROTFLMAO.

I have incredible discipline to go with an iron-clad
determination to always do what I say I'm going to do.

Quick, somebody, help me up. My sides are splitting.

And I saved a
gambling-only bankroll years ago. I really don't know of anyone

else

like me in those respects.

That's because you'd deny outright that anyone but you could be
successful. You really are a stitch.

You and your AP buddies, on the other
hand, are the epitome of illogic when it comes to gambling.

There you go again. Somebody help me please. Ohhhhhhhhhhhh. .. Whew,
I think I'm going to be alright. Ahhhhhhhhh. Ok, go on.

You have
little respect for yourselves as you tramp from casino to casino

all

the time, you have no discipline when it comes to whether to quit

and

enjoy the money or keep on playing for the points and the teeny

weeny

percentage that awaits as you step into your graves, you have no
ability to just pass by a machine as it beckons you, and you've
totally lost touch with reality and other more important aspects in
life.

Are you done now? I sometimes wonder if you have any idea how stupid
you sound.

>
> Lie. I've caught you soooooooo many times and gave references to
> boot. In addition, using Aces_hii to post proves it again and
again. Are you senile or what?

Examples, or you're just the same as you've always been--a sour
person who uses name-calling without proof. aces_hii?? I didn't

know

we all had to put our names in our e-mail addresses! Maybe you

ought

to talk to Bill Gates about that if it bothers you.......

You asked for proof. I gave it to you. Suck it up.

>
> > But you have nothing more than geek-speculation on yout side.
> > Go ahead. Give a concrete example and I'll show you where

you're

in
> > dreamland once again.
>
> I just did, aces_hii. Oh, and what about that 5/6 level
progression?
> You stated you use 6 levels and not 5, and I showed you stating

you

> used a 5 level progression. This is soooooooooo easy.

Read the strategy again. How dumb can you be?

Read your own post again, moron. LMAO. Do you realize that your
constant denial, when faced with absolute proof, makes everything
else you say meaningless. How can anyone believe anything that you
say now (or in the future) when you deny something they can read for
themselves.

>
> > This must mean that you're either losing it, or the wife is
> anxiously
> > pulling at you to go out and gamble.
>
> This means I understand the simplest of truths about VP. It makes
> scammers like you cringe because it takes all the air out of your
> sails. If you disagree, describe how you play that is NOT "one

hand

> at a time".

But....it IS one hand at a time little dicky! Where did you get

that

air in your sails that says it's not??

You told me read your website to find out how you play. I said I
didn't need to because I already knew how you played ... "one hand at
a time". Now, you just admitted you play exactly like I stated.

>
> > > > I play a 6-level progression,
> > >
> > > Is that so ... from
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/838
> > >
> > > You stated,
> > >
> > > "and because of the progression (in this case, $1/$2/$5/$10/
$25)"
> >
> > See where I said "In this case?" Go back and read my strategy
again
> > and count the levels. You really do need to get your facts
straight
> > before you type.
>
> Hey you either play 5 levels sometimes or you don't. You

indicated

> here that you did not and I just showed where you previously
stated,
> uncatagorically, that you did. This is what being caught in

another

> lie feels like. Get used to it.

Read the strategy again, little dicky, and stop trying to make
yourself feel good about making a mistake and being caught at it.

Eat your own words, liar. You said it was 5 levels and then you said
it wasn't. That's called a lie.

>
> > > Sure sounds like a five level progression to me. In any

event,

> the
> > > number of progressions has no effect on the expectation. I
really
> > > don't care if you play 2 levels or 9 levels.
> >
> > First it's important and then it isn't.
> > How about unlimited levels
> > with an unlimited bankroll?
>
> There's no such thing. Shall we discuss the tooth fairy or Santa?

You're the fool that's into theory, remember?? Kinda stings when

you

get whacked in the but with the tight end of a towel, doesn't it!

Nope. You're the one who made the idiotic statment. LMAO.

>
> > Care then? So be careful AGAIN before you
> > type something you're assuming.
>
> Why should I care about impossible dreams. If you run into an
> unlimited progression please let me know. Otherwise, take your

baby

> tooth out from under your pillow, mama's not going to help you

here.

Why? Because you're entire life is a fantasy, and of all people an
idiot like you ought to be able to comprenend anything.

I only deal with the facts. You deal with the lies and fantasies as I
have proven once again.

> > >
> > > > The amount I lose is
> > > > reported, but the debate is because of your jealousy about
me.
> > You just don't WANT it to be that way, but guess what? The nerd
> comes
> > > in 2hd place again, and in this case, 2nd place is LAST place.
> > >
> > > Next time try adding in a fact or two in your idiotic

response.

> > With
> > > your own admission to playing a 5 level progression that I
quoted
> > and
> > > your attmept to deny it now, the only thing you've

accomplished

> is
> > > proving, once again, that you are a liar.
> >
> > Thank you for confirming that you don't know what you're

talking

> > about once again. That response is so jumbled that even your
former
> > room full of IBM nerds couldn't decipher even a portion of it.
>
> Can't deny it can you? You've been caught in another lie and all
you
> can do is display your jealousy for all to see.
>
> > Therefore, your wagering with me is
> > theoretically geek-safe for you. There'll be few if any

positive

> > machines, and most of the play will be on negative games. Now I
> can't
> > POSSIBLY win with that scenario, can I little dicky? So are you
> ready
> > to step up to the plate or what? What's your escape clause this
> time??
>
> I don't need one. You have been caught in a lie. What more do I
need?
> You are a fraud. You've claimed that payback doesn't matter and

now

> you claim it does. You are simply the stupidest person I have

ever

> come across.

Skip the nonsense of your face-saving over and over again.

I wish you would, but you can't admit your lies even in the face of
overwhelming evidence. Fortunately, everyone else can read and see
exactly who you are. A liar and a fraud.

Let's get
to the meat of it. Are you going to accept betting me on 50

sessions

of my strategy or not? If not, why not? Are you afraid of me or

what?

Answer all the questions.

Sorry, moron, your were given the chance to make a bet and you backed
out. Your obvious attempts to save face have no effect on me and only
underline how pathetic you've become when the real Rob Singer has
been unmasked and your lies are obvious to everyone.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>

wrote:

> > >
> > > LMAO. Talking about yourself again monkey boy? It's so

obvious

to
> > the rest of us and you are so blinded by your own ego that you
> can't
> > see it.
> >
> > Doesn't take much of an ego to see that you moved to LV out of

an

> > addiction, to go along with those four sweaty hands.
>
> No, it only takes a scammer trying to sell his wares. Your

pathetic

> attempts to play the addiction card have been nailed. You are the
one
> with the addiction that you've NEVER recovered from.

Avoiding the point? another telltale sign of an addicted gambler
who's in denial.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Now get some help for your
number 6) gambling problem .

>
> > > Nope. The only one you keep GETTING to is yourself. Each and
> every
> > > one of your posts shows just how stupid you are.
> >
> > Then I LOVE to be stupid
>
> Clearly.

VERY clearly. Getting to you is worth every drop of whatever you

want

me to be!

LMAO. Let me know when that happens.

>
> > Here's some help, and I'll offer it up for free since you both
are
> > gambling addicts that need every spare penny to throw into the
> > machines on your DAILY trots: You can do one of your famous
looking
> > up on the Internet for statistics if it makes you feel better,
but
> > the common, normal person knows that LV is home to more

domestic

> > violence than any other major city. Why? Yup--Because of the
> > gambling.
>
> Until you provide some references I can just assume you made this
up.
> One more attempt to hide your scam behind pathetic assertions.

Per your usual MO, when you know it's true you won't look up the
stats.

Nope. I only look up facts for the things I present. It's up to you
to provide facts for the things you state. Your inability to provide
them is clear evidence that you are lying.

>
> > Just by your irritability with me and the fact that I win
> > so often and so much,
>
> And with the help of your inheritance. LMAO.

Yup--Currently at $645k (and growing) plus $210k. Lots to laugh
about, in fact, I do it every time I get ready to take a trip to
Nevada.

There you go again. You are a walking billboard for the classical
addicted gambler. What was that ... "constantly bringing up their
successes" ... You need help.

>
> > I can see why it affects you at home.
>
> No you can't. You don't have a clue. As much as you would like
(just
> one of) your assertions to be true, the fact is, you've been

wrong

> EVERY time. Now, go try out for that next fedex commercial. Maybe
> they'll give you French benefits.

Yes I can. It's written all over you and others like you.

You wish. It's your addiction that won't let you see the truth.

Have you got this thing about Fed-X and the guy you call Trudeau or
what?? Is that the French reference? Maybe you should have visited
France in your lifetime--or, OK, I get it! You've been to Paris

hotel

& casino, so THAT makes it that you've BEEN to France! Wow--did I

get

duped!!

LMAO. Someday, after you get help for your problems, I'll explain it
to you.

>
> > Don't
> > fret though. You're in the same predicament as all the other

gold

> > diggers who came to town thinking they could make withdrawals

as

> easy
> > as 1-2-3....
>
> My current position is ... ahead about $100K in less than two
years.
> And, that's only part time (you seemed to have forgotten that I'm
> only here 1/2 the year). Not a bad "predicament".

And my chicken laid 400 eggs this morning in half the time the one
next to her did. OK, if you're telling the truth, tell me where you
play, where you've been winning, and if I have a contact at the

place

(and I do pay some people for info) I'll check it out.

Sure you do. That would be in violation of FEDERAL privacy laws and
these people would be risking putting themselves in serious trouble.
Do you really think anyone believes this malarky. It's all part of
your addiction that makes you lie again and again.

If you're
being honest, then I'll post a retraction about my views on AP's.

Sure you will. But, I'll throw you a bone. Check out the Edgewater in
Laughlin. And, next time your in LV, look me up and I'll provide
ample evidence in private. However, get that gambling addiction
looked at first. I believe the website I referenced could help you
find someone that can help.

>
> > just like Yuri the "EXPERT" vp player. In fact, VPFree's
> > got a bundle of them who blab incessantly about "the upcoming
move"
> > and how they just can't wait, then all you see for a few months
> after
> > the arrival is post after post after post about their prowess,
the
> > freebies they get, and a hoard of frivilous questions because
> they're
> > all pumped up about being a fantasy player that's on their way
> > to "being like Mike".
>
> More assertions, no supporting evidence. Do you really think

anyone

> believes these idiotic assertions? Tell you what. Name a few APs
who
> have failed, give me their email addresses so I can verify they
> exist. After that I will post what they had to say. Oh, and don't
> bother with underbankrolled players who have no idea what a

penalty

> card looks like. They are not APs.

VPFree has all the past info on this loser Yuri S. That's one prime
example from the top.

And, the only one you have EVER mentioned. Seems kind of odd that you
can only come up with one when you claim ALL APs are losers. Let's
face it, the statistics that you hate so much predicts there would be
a few failures along with hundreds and hundreds of winners. Only a
complete moron would think naming a single individual is evidence of
anything but irrational thinking on your part.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "aces_hii" <aces_hii@y...> wrote:

> > And make money doin' it. That's the difference between you and
APs.
> > We know how to make money while you can only talk about it.
>
> You know what's dumb about your fantasy? You AP's think you're
doing everything under the casino radar, when in fact by your own
addiction to slot club cards, you're every move at the machines and

slot clubs is being recorded, analyzed, and acted upon.

Sure they are. I'm sure the casinos spend millions of dollars
following every move of the .25 APs. Are you for real?

Keep on denying. It's the only way you can sleep at night..... Here's
more. Wanna know why they slowed down the FPDW machines at Sam's
Town? I talked to them about doing it BEFORE they did it, and you'd
never understand or accept the reason why. They will be sped up down
the road some, but information is the name of the game in the casino
business. And are you the same clown that claims to have profited
$50k/year on quarters? Let's see....if there's the "hundreds of AP's
lurking the streets of LV" like you and the other few like to blab
there is with no support whatsoever, then wouldn't 'millions of
dollars on 25c players' be appropriate? Take your time, make up your
mind, and think about an answer before writing it down this time.

> I have several very
> close contacts within that specific part of the industry as you

may

> know, such as at the Palms, Wynn, TI, and one of the Fiestas.

Sure you do ... And, I bet they risk their jobs passing

confidential information just to you. What planet are you from?

The planet that says pay me and I'll tell you anything. Are you for
real or what? I see you also still carry around that nerd label
slapped firmly into your forehead. That limits your ability to have
friends and acquantainces in the right places. Some of us know how to
talk to others face to face to glean and trade information. All geeks
now how to do is sned data and text.

> And guess what? It's the same answer all the
> time: "The advantage players like to think we don't know who they
> are, but their play habits are the easiest to track of all

players.

Easy to track. But of no interest. That's the catch and I've told

you this many times already. They are not interested in the small
fish. So, if you think you're providing some scary revelation, think
again.

First, in the casino business EVERYONE who comes thru the doors is of
interest. You're just so naiive about what you pretend to know gobs
about, aren't you. Dancer says they're not interested in the big fish
because they draw others in with their stories of victory. The Queen
says they're not interested in her because she's just a granny from
Indiana. You have your nonsense reason. But what do you all have in
common? Why, you all WIN WIN WIN, and get everything else you need in
life for FREE!! And not ONE of you are an addict to boot!!! It's
HILARIOUS!!!!!!!! But guess what, it also keeps me digging, and I
find out everything sooner or later. That's why I'm considered
controversial and despised by the geeks and gurus. I get the info and
then write columns about it in a format that they all know what and
whom I'm referring to, and in this industry truth is a dirty word.

> If ANY of these people at ANY level -- esp. the ones who

publicize their victories time and again in the media -- were beating
us over time, they'd be tossed. We

We?

I don't blame you for not wanting to explain that.

> throw out BJ counters even before they
> play a hand--so anyone who doesn't believe we'd do the same to a
> video poker player with a true advantage who is winning, is

nuts".

Yes, you are nuts. That's already been verified.

....Nor that.

> I
> understand that, it makes perfect sense to me, and you don't want
to get it because you want to perpetuate this nonsense about how

AP's win win win in order to talk yourself into justifying why you
play far more than you should.

Yada, yada, yada. So little time ... so much BS.

....Nor apparently that. Hey, there's lots of time. And lots of
truth. Not too appetizing, is it.

> It's the same disease you all have, and I'm
> more than happy to expose it publicly as often as possible.

I see, you're now admitting that you help out the casinos whenever
possible. Why don't you print that in your next column. Better yet,
maybe someone else with a column might decide to quote you and your
collusion with the casinos.

However you got that response for the above quote, is a mystery. but
then again most of your responses are mysterious. Casinos and I are
enemies, but I've got 3 identities that they've been introduced to,
and the info I get, as you've seen and personally experienced, irks
people. That's what I love about this stuff, and what I love about
what I've learned to do from my early working career. I'm way ahead
of a sad bunch of addicted gamblers and all they can do is argue with
me, make posts about how I supposedly worked '9-5' when I was doing
something way beyond their comprehension for about a year and a half
because of, ever hear of it--nine eleven?, and why I'm completely
immune to the criticizms, impossible to substantiate claims about me
and/or my play strategy, and name-calling. This whole thing is like
taking candy from a crying baby, and it's more fun than I ever
imagined. When I started out I never knew there'd be so many fools,
idiots, envious players, and as many certifieable video poker addicts
like you as there is. As the list grows so does my strength. In fact,
here's one for you. I received a call from one of your LOCAL LV
ADVANTAGE VP PLAYERS WITH A FAMOUS NAME (and his name will be in
print--that's the agreement) in tears a few nights ago, and I'm
meeting with him in a few weeks for an interview at his request. The
purpose? He's tired of the so-called myth surrounding AP's in video
poker, about how they win all the time and get all the stuff they
want for free--like taking the words out of my own mouth. He's lost
over $80k in the last week, and is behind $230k for the past year.
And in his life he's never been ahead of video poker, contrary to the
nonsense and his pals that says he is ahead. YOU will benefit from
this. And so won't you, and you and you and you. If there were any
more people with no clue reading this then I'd add them in too.

> You claim
> I have some sort of a scam going,

Yep. Your idiotic scam system ... and now, with your own admission

to helping out the casinos whenever possible, it may come tumbling
down.

OH goody. Please take your turn at sending the wrecking ball my way.
I'll eat it up and spit it out, just like I've always done with a
smile.

> when it's really you and the rest
> of your addict peers who are consistently being caught acting out
> your fantasy scam over and over again. Can life be any sweeter to
me or what.......

If looking like an idiot is "sweet" for you, so be it.

I guess it's kind of hard responding to the truth. The funny part is,
you probably thought about this and struggled with a one-liner for 15
minutes before coming up with those words of wisdom!

> Face it. You moved to LV for the same reason misscraps, Jean

Scott,

> Bob Dancer, and at least 40 others I've talked to in the past

year

> did--TO BE CLOSER TO THE VP MACHINES! And that translates into

only

> one thing--TO BE ABLE TO FEED YOUR UGLY HABITS MORE OFTEN!

Wrong again oh great swami. I moved to LV to get away from snow and
cold in the winter. Are you always wrong?

And you forgot to mention the crisp, clean air, the lack of a state
tax, the cheaper home prices, the wonderful health care, and the 300+
days of sunshine. I hear it from the addicts not ashamed to tell me
the truth all the time. You're only kidding yourself, and the BS of
it all won't start to wear off until the sweaty palms begin to dry
up.

> Blaming others as you
> did your wife when all fingers point to you.

Lie. I never blamed my wife for anything. That was you, moron.

Yes, and I did it for you and you've never once came to her rescue.
That's says all you really ever care about is your next run to the
machines.

http://www.addictionrecov.org/sixtypes.htm

Under this set of deinitions I am number 4), a serious social
gambler. You on the other hand show all the aspects of number 6).
Especially, note the comment about lying. Finally, note that for
someone to qualify as addicted, there must be detrimental effects,
losing and chasing losses. None of those apply to successful APs.

All

this proves is your constant references to addiction are only a
reflection on your own problems. Also:

http://www.calproblemgambling.org/gambling.html

States that "there are distortions in thinking ... These include
denial, fixed beliefs, superstition and other kinds of magical
thinking, and notably omnipotence"

Denial - Your constant need to call everyone else addicted.
Fixed beliefs - No one else can win.
Magical thinking - Your hocus pocus progressive system.
Omnipotence - This is pretty obvious.

Ring a bell? You need help.

The Internet geek at his best. You'll do ANYTHING to find a way to
talk your way out of the pickle you've gotten yourself into. Don't
you see it? You can't accept the mess you've made for yourself, so
all you can do is claim it's 'somebody else' (RS) and not you, blame
others (your wife) for your gambling problem, and paint a rosey make-
believe picture of fantasy (other "AP's" who are soooo successful but
NEVER addicted to gambling even though they are in casinos more time
than they are in bed). One has to wonder what's next with you. I
never got past your point before I recovered. So keep me informed and
I'll be happy to write about your digression!

> Except for the facts you won't accept--87% and +$645k. Mostly on
> negative machines.

No one cares. Too bad your monsterous ego won't accept that FACT.

No one but YOU! Actually, there's a handful of other envious people
who care right along with you, so don't feel alone.

> > Logic is the one thing you know nothing about. If you only play
> > positive machines 5-10% of the time at low levels then you

should

> > have no problem going back to Cogno and taking his bet. It

should

> be a sure thing ... LMAO again.
>
> Hello again McFLY!! 50 sessions on other than my strategy for a
loser like him (or you)?

In other words, you won't back up your words with actions. Of

course, we already knew that.

Are you now asking me to bet you on my strategy? Of course I will!
I'll bet him too!! Let's get with it here and stop wasting time.

> I'll be happy to play one session for
> you idiots on >99.3% machines--heck, I'll even play the whole

thing on 6/5 BP and 8/5 DDB if you wish. I'll still win and you know
it!

The bet is the bet. Either accept it as Cogno offered or quit

whining

and looking like a fool. If you REALLY thought you could win you'd
have accepted the bet immediately. What's even more fun is you keep
bringing it up so I can stick it to you again and again.

I've already humiliated Congo publicly, so that's no issue with me.
But I see you're a bit uneasy about the loss sustained by "your side"
on that one where I always get the last laugh. So the fun part now is
for you to either accept a bet where I play a 1-time session as
indicated above on highly negative machines, or a 50-session RS
strategy bet. The more times you weasel-word your way around thiese
the more cowardly you appear. So how about it, big boy? You don't get
called that at home, and I'm offering to make you a star! Are you man
enough?? I'll even get you a date with a 23-year old bevertainer from
the Rio if you accept. OK, so it just shrunk from embarrassment.
Don't fret. Nerds are like that. But take one or both of the bets,
won't you little dicky.....

> and you envy/hate me for it, why are you
> afraid to challenge me to play MY strategy for $350k??

Because anyone can win playing positive games. Why are you so

scared

to play your strategy on 99.2% games when you've said for years

that

the pay table doesn't matter?

How's this. I'd be equally 'scared' to play my strategy on FPDW all
the way to $100 because it's not a winner period. It failed the test
when I began the strategy development. That game's for fools, and the
game you say you play (OEJ's) is for even bigger fools.

> > Everyone who plays cares about winning. Therefore, they care
about the expectation. You sound like you'd bet on tails when

someone is flipping a two-headed coin.

>
> Only you would be dumb enough--probably by genes and not from

lack of education--to say something so stupid repeatedly.

You shouldn't denigrate your own parents like this.

You're stuck again, admit it! By thye way, tell us about your
children. I've been meaning to bring that up. Since we're talking
about parents, let's understand where little dicky's coming from a
bit better, shall we? Tell us what kind of youngsters he sired from
behind the walls in the patent office.

> > No AP says anything about a single session. In fact, we all

know

we
> > will lose most days even playing on positive machines. We also
know
> > we will be further ahead than if we had played negative
expectation
> > games, and, as each year comes to a close the vast majority of

us

> > will have made money. Do you assert the vast majority of

players

> > using your progressive system on (mostly) negative machines

will

be
> > ahead at the end of the year???
>
> Boy, are you a misled individual. Where do you come up with such
> stories?

The truth hurts, doesn't it. All one has to do is listen to ANYONE
but you.

Now I know why you post your make-believe nonsense all over the
Internet forums, acting like you're the expert's expert in some sort
of feeble attempt at getting the acceptance and attention from others
that OBVIOUSLY was left out at home over the years. You're grinding
your own ax! What a kick!!

I don't assert anyone but me will be ahead playing my strategy

Of course not, it's a scam. You just don't happen to mention that

the majority of players will be losers if they try your system.

And I don't care about anyone but me, while you, because you lose,
have a need to make up stories about winners and how you want it to
be that they can play to be winners 'like you'. I see it all the
time, and it's always from people who cannot win no matter what.

(yeah--
> you got it right this time with the "mostly negative machines")

at

> the end of a year. Why? Because a big part of it has to do with
> mental make up.

Do you put that on with a brush or a pad? ROTFLMAO.

> I have incredible discipline to go with an iron-clad
> determination to always do what I say I'm going to do.

Quick, somebody, help me up. My sides are splitting.

Don't let all that fat come rolling out at once. You know, the type
AP's get from sitting in those chairs for hour after hour. they sure
are a pretty bunch.

> And I saved a
> gambling-only bankroll years ago. I really don't know of anyone
else
> like me in those respects.

That's because you'd deny outright that anyone but you could be
successful. You really are a stitch.

I know I'm the only one who's consistently successful. No one else
has proven anything to anyone, and they never will because they never
can. All they have is fantasy, theoretical nonsense, and casino
managers who have data saying they are not what they make believe
they are--which I've seen in several cases. I suspect that includes
you too.

> You have
> little respect for yourselves as you tramp from casino to casino
all
> the time, you have no discipline when it comes to whether to quit
and
> enjoy the money or keep on playing for the points and the teeny
weeny
> percentage that awaits as you step into your graves, you have no
> ability to just pass by a machine as it beckons you, and you've
> totally lost touch with reality and other more important aspects

in life.

Are you done now? I sometimes wonder if you have any idea how

stupid you sound.

You know, whenever I bring up the fact that you've eliminated
anything real from your 'life' it hits a nerve. It's more than
obvious. You just can't escape that stigma you've created for
yourself. And if I ran into you tomorrow it'd be written all over
your face!

> > Lie. I've caught you soooooooo many times and gave references

to

> > boot. In addition, using Aces_hii to post proves it again and
> again. Are you senile or what?
>
> Examples, or you're just the same as you've always been--a sour
> person who uses name-calling without proof. aces_hii?? I didn't
know
> we all had to put our names in our e-mail addresses! Maybe you
ought
> to talk to Bill Gates about that if it bothers you.......

You asked for proof. I gave it to you. Suck it up.

Did I miss it here? Are you using disappearing print--is that one of
your 'IBM' patents that they kept all the profits for??
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

> > Read the strategy again. How dumb can you be?

Read your own post again, moron. LMAO. Do you realize that your
constant denial, when faced with absolute proof, makes everything
else you say meaningless. How can anyone believe anything that you
say now (or in the future) when you deny something they can read

for themselves.

Read the strategy again. You might see 4 other strategies that I play
along with the first. According to little dicky's pea brain, if I
don't play FIVE levels in any of them then I'm lying. I can't defend
myself again your incompetence, so keep making believe so you feel
OK. Now let's get back to that disappearing pring patent. How many
fart-smelling geeks were involved in that 'authoring'? Plase,
somebody STOP me....NOW, before I toss up my cobbler!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You told me read your website to find out how you play. I said I
didn't need to because I already knew how you played ... "one hand

at a time". Now, you just admitted you play exactly like I stated.

Geek logic. Wax-on, Wax-off. Which is crazier?

> > Hey you either play 5 levels sometimes or you don't. You
indicated
> > here that you did not and I just showed where you previously
> stated,
> > uncatagorically, that you did. This is what being caught in
another
> > lie feels like. Get used to it.
>
> Read the strategy again, little dicky, and stop trying to make
> yourself feel good about making a mistake and being caught at it.

Eat your own words, liar. You said it was 5 levels and then you

said it wasn't. That's called a lie.

I though you knew my strategy--either you do or you don't. Which one
are you talking about? I can play 3-6 levels at any time. You see, in
a world where people are in control of what they do and how they do
it, I'm able to choose what I play and how i play. You on the other
hand are controlled by casinos and CANNOT choose what you do. That's
what you need to get over before you can begin understanding how the
outside world operates.

> > > First it's important and then it isn't.
> > > How about unlimited levels
> > > with an unlimited bankroll?
> >
> > There's no such thing. Shall we discuss the tooth fairy or

Santa?

>
> You're the fool that's into theory, remember?? Kinda stings when
you
> get whacked in the but with the tight end of a towel, doesn't it!

Nope. You're the one who made the idiotic statment. LMAO.

And you're the nerd who believes in theories that aren't real.

> > Why should I care about impossible dreams. If you run into an
> > unlimited progression please let me know. Otherwise, take your
baby
> > tooth out from under your pillow, mama's not going to help you
here.
>
> Why? Because you're entire life is a fantasy, and of all people

an

> idiot like you ought to be able to comprenend anything.

I only deal with the facts. You deal with the lies and fantasies as

I

have proven once again.

You're life is driven by fantasy and the make-believe. From birth you
were telling your Dr. how many times to slap your butt to get you
going because you had a theory. You were a total loss even before you
opened your eyes.

> Let's get
> to the meat of it. Are you going to accept betting me on 50
sessions
> of my strategy or not? If not, why not? Are you afraid of me or
what?
> Answer all the questions.

Sorry, moron, your were given the chance to make a bet and you

backed

out. Your obvious attempts to save face have no effect on me and

only

underline how pathetic you've become when the real Rob Singer has
been unmasked and your lies are obvious to everyone.

This rant tells me you fear me. Just as I suspected all along. An
Internet geek who hides behind his computer at home. You've fizzled
in the face of superiority, and you won't walk the walk. A weak
person who's controlled by the casinos, he blames his own wife (if he
still has one) for his misery, and his only real sense of worth is
posting nonsense on the Internet. I love evey minute of this victory!

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...> wrote: