vpFREE2 Forums

Dick Decomposed

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

> BTW, don't think everyone hasn't noticed how you are attempting

to

> avoid the output of my simulation that demonstrates conclusively
that
> your progressive system is worthless. And, now that you can't

fall

> back on hot/cold cycles without further demonstrating that you

are

> lying, I guess this case is just about closed.

You've already been labeled as a charlatan when it comes to
programming ability. Gee...too bad they still don't have those

punch

cards from your hey-day!!! You might feel a little more confident
after you've been exposed by me multiple times as a leading quack

in

the field.

I guess IBM must think a "charlatan" is worth quite a bit. Otherwise,
I doubt they would have kept paying me those 6 figure amounts.

Really now, Rob, do you think anyone takes your silly assertions
seriously? Don't you realize how foolish you look when such lame
responses? You may as well stand up and shout "I'm an idiot".

> Rob, can't you see how pathetic these content-free posts of yours
> make you look? The topic was Matingale and I gave an example

where

> someone failed using that worthless technique. Rather than
accepting
> what you knew to be true (since you have read the book), you try

to

> change the subject and throw out an insult in the process. Now,

if

> you really know about any "meaningful programming" on a

Martingale

> system, send it to me. I will assess it and, not doubt, point out
> many fallacies.

I thought my truthful depiction of you being a phony real-life
programmer would cause a little hurt.....

I guess you "thought" wrong ... again. Now, stand up and shout it
out ... one ... more ... time.

PS. I guess this means Rob won't be sending me any code (which we all
know never existed in the first place). Rob, how does it feel to get
in lie after lie?

···

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

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111" <robsinger1111@...>
wrote:

Of course, once again when pressed for words you resort to avoiding
the issue while pretending to not have been destroyed by my logic.

Here's a very nice example of projecting self-inadequacies onto
others. You'll find them in just about every post because Mr.
Inadequate has a lot of inadequacies to project.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111" <robsinger1111@...>
wrote:

You might feel a little more confident

after you've been exposed by me multiple times as a leading quack in
the field.

Hey ... here's another.

> HAHAHA! As EVERYONE already knows, everything I say and do has an
> ENORMOUS impact on you and that video-poker driven life you lead.
In
> fact, based on all your posting on all the forums along with your
> self-proclaimed and proudly announced sickly number of hours you
> spend in the casinos nearly every day, I'd say the lessons you
learn
> from me, irregardless of the stomach upsets they provide, easily
are
> the highlights of your days.

Yawn ... let me know when you come up with something original. Oh,

I

forgot to mention I hit another RF a couple of days ago which puts

me

at a new record yearly high. You gotta love it ...

How about: "You gotta not care about it immensely and feel sorry for
me at the same time!" All you project when you stammer thru those
type of proclamations to the normal person who hasn't sold his or her
soul to the devil is how sick you must be in order to play that
often.
  

> Ummm....you mean like terminating the discussions due to rapidly
> increasing embarrassment over the slaughtering I dole out to you
> regularly?? There's only so much humiliation I can bear to watch
> another absorb. I think you're my all-time record.

A wishin' and a hopin' .... Could you hum a few bars?

I'll leave that in there for continued effect.....

Rob, get serious, there is NO way to explain why you would use a
complex system instead of just milking hot cycles. Unless, of

course,

we assume the complex system is a scam and there really is no such
thing as hot cycles. You remember? It's called the TRUTH.

Should you ever understand the cycles, see me. Looking for hot cycles
is a waste of time--but you're a master of that by the amount of time
you waste your life away in the casinos, so it just may be the ticket
for you!

···

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

I guess IBM must think a "charlatan" is worth quite a bit.

Otherwise, I doubt they would have kept paying me those 6 figure
amounts.

And you forgot to add in how many royals you get :slight_smile: As a Systems
Engineering Manager for several years I went through a ton of useless
programmers just like you until I found one who actually knew the
software code and the system parameters WITHOUT winging it as you do
with your sloppy video poker analysis.

The topic was Matingale and I gave an example where
someone failed using that worthless technique. Rather than
accepting what you knew to be true (since you have read the book),

you try to change the subject and throw out an insult in the process.
Now,if you really know about any "meaningful programming" on a

Martingale system, send it to me. I will assess it and, not doubt,

point out many fallacies.

I almost feel like apologizing so you won't pout any more.

The reason I ignored your assertion about Martingale is because it
has nothing to do with my vp strategy. But you grab onto it because
it's the commercialized reason the gurus bad-mouthed me and they
still got nowhere, so you simply followed their lead. How's it feel
being in nowhere?

> I thought my truthful depiction of you being a phony real-life
> programmer would cause a little hurt.....

I guess you "thought" wrong ... again. Now, stand up and shout it
out ... one ... more ... time.

Are you kidding? Having used punch cards doesn't exactly qualify you
for the modern age of programming! And I see on the forums you first
manipulate your past then milk it for all the reaction you can get
from all the dips--by simply copying what others have already
simulated in the past or, as in the case of this thread, making up
scenarios that you would never expect anyone here to spot. Your
bubble has burst again....

···

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

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

> > HAHAHA! As EVERYONE already knows, everything I say and do has

an

> > ENORMOUS impact on you and that video-poker driven life you

lead.

> In
> > fact, based on all your posting on all the forums along with

your

> > self-proclaimed and proudly announced sickly number of hours

you

> > spend in the casinos nearly every day, I'd say the lessons you
> learn
> > from me, irregardless of the stomach upsets they provide,

easily

> are
> > the highlights of your days.
>
> Yawn ... let me know when you come up with something original.

Oh,

I
> forgot to mention I hit another RF a couple of days ago which

puts

me
> at a new record yearly high. You gotta love it ...

How about: "You gotta not care about it immensely and feel sorry

for

me at the same time!" All you project when you stammer thru those
type of proclamations to the normal person who hasn't sold his or

her

soul to the devil is how sick you must be in order to play that
often.

The envy is rolling off you, Robbie. Maybe you should gulp down more
of those Christmas spirits because today I walked away with another
$1100. You gotta love it ...

> > Ummm....you mean like terminating the discussions due to

rapidly

> > increasing embarrassment over the slaughtering I dole out to

you

> > regularly?? There's only so much humiliation I can bear to

watch

> > another absorb. I think you're my all-time record.
>
> A wishin' and a hopin' .... Could you hum a few bars?

I'll leave that in there for continued effect.....

> Rob, get serious, there is NO way to explain why you would use a
> complex system instead of just milking hot cycles. Unless, of
course,
> we assume the complex system is a scam and there really is no

such

> thing as hot cycles. You remember? It's called the TRUTH.

Should you ever understand the cycles, see me. Looking for hot

cycles

is a waste of time--but you're a master of that by the amount of

time

you waste your life away in the casinos, so it just may be the

ticket

for you!

For once we get a splinter of truth from Rob ... "Looking for hot
cycles is a waste of time". Since they don't exist that is pretty
much a given. Don't you feel a bit foolish, Robbie, when one of your
lies completely exposes your other lies. You gotta love it ...

···

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

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

> I guess IBM must think a "charlatan" is worth quite a bit.
Otherwise, I doubt they would have kept paying me those 6 figure
amounts.

And you forgot to add in how many royals you get :slight_smile: As a Systems
Engineering Manager for several years I went through a ton of

useless

programmers just like you until I found one who actually knew the
software code and the system parameters WITHOUT winging it as you

do

with your sloppy video poker analysis.

Boy you just can't quit making a fool out of yourself. You just
validated exactly the opposite of what you stated before. Since no
one got rid of me, then by your definition that makes me a good
programmer. You gotta love it ...

>The topic was Matingale and I gave an example where
> someone failed using that worthless technique. Rather than
> accepting what you knew to be true (since you have read the

book),

you try to change the subject and throw out an insult in the

process.

Now,if you really know about any "meaningful programming" on a
> Martingale system, send it to me. I will assess it and, not

doubt,

point out many fallacies.

I almost feel like apologizing so you won't pout any more.

The reason I ignored your assertion about Martingale is because it
has nothing to do with my vp strategy. But you grab onto it because
it's the commercialized reason the gurus bad-mouthed me and they
still got nowhere, so you simply followed their lead. How's it feel
being in nowhere?

You're the one who brought up Martingale and claimed it had some kind
of validity. Of course, this was foolish of you, and trying to
backtrack now makes it obvious that it was just another one of your
lies. Rob, you are an open book ... the more you type the more open
you are.

> > I thought my truthful depiction of you being a phony real-life
> > programmer would cause a little hurt.....

> I guess you "thought" wrong ... again. Now, stand up and shout it
> out ... one ... more ... time.

Are you kidding? Having used punch cards doesn't exactly qualify

you

for the modern age of programming!

And, pray tell, what would that be? I should leave this for Rob to
stammer around as he knows absolutely nothing about programming. But,
I'll let him off the hook here. Rob, all you need to do is explain OO
design/development and intelligent agents and I will give you credit
for a bare minimum of knowledge on the subject.

And I see on the forums you first
manipulate your past then milk it for all the reaction you can get
from all the dips--by simply copying what others have already
simulated in the past or, as in the case of this thread, making up
scenarios that you would never expect anyone here to spot. Your
bubble has burst again....

Yawn, once again Rob types lots of words with NO content. Let's see
you support these assertions with one single supporting fact. Can't
do it? What a surprise.

···

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

Boy you just can't quit making a fool out of yourself. You just
validated exactly the opposite of what you stated before. Since no
one got rid of me, then by your definition that makes me a good
programmer. You gotta love it ...

I eliminated several useless programmers from my department but no
one "got rid of" them either. They were simply put out to pasture in
some poor schlock's department until they RETIRED EARLY!!
   

You're the one who brought up Martingale and claimed it had some

kind of validity.

Yo Mr. Magoo--that was in HELLO!? BLACKJACK!

And, pray tell, what would that be? I should leave this for Rob to
stammer around as he knows absolutely nothing about programming.

But, I'll let him off the hook here. Rob, all you need to do is
explain OO design/development and intelligent agents and I will give
you credit for a bare minimum of knowledge on the subject.

So the punch card era comment really got to you I see.....More proof
of how the truth does hurt. Oh, and I'll ask you one of your Mr.
Wizard questions too--Explain the nine required coding variables for
F-16 and F-15 primary communications encryption, why four of those
variables cannot be used in the F-18, and how your so-
called "intelligent agents" has nothing to do with the secure
infrastructure of that type of communications system. And here's a
hint since you'll undoubtedly claim the information's secret: It
isn't and has never been. This type of programming is also used in
commercial business communications.

···

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

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

> Boy you just can't quit making a fool out of yourself. You just
> validated exactly the opposite of what you stated before. Since

no

> one got rid of me, then by your definition that makes me a good
> programmer. You gotta love it ...

I eliminated several useless programmers from my department but no
one "got rid of" them either. They were simply put out to pasture

in

some poor schlock's department until they RETIRED EARLY!!

Is THAT what happened to you? You were "put out to pasture". Don't
you just love it when Rob's projection tells us about his past.

> You're the one who brought up Martingale and claimed it had some
kind of validity.

Yo Mr. Magoo--that was in HELLO!? BLACKJACK!

Yup. Still was you. Any other bright comments to avoid the question
at hand?

> And, pray tell, what would that be? I should leave this for Rob

to

> stammer around as he knows absolutely nothing about programming.
But, I'll let him off the hook here. Rob, all you need to do is
explain OO design/development and intelligent agents and I will

give

you credit for a bare minimum of knowledge on the subject.

So the punch card era comment really got to you I see.....More

proof

of how the truth does hurt. Oh, and I'll ask you one of your Mr.
Wizard questions too--Explain the nine required coding variables

for

F-16 and F-15 primary communications encryption, why four of those
variables cannot be used in the F-18, and how your so-
called "intelligent agents" has nothing to do with the secure
infrastructure of that type of communications system. And here's a
hint since you'll undoubtedly claim the information's secret: It
isn't and has never been. This type of programming is also used in
commercial business communications.

Translation: Rob has no idea how answer my question because he knows
absolutely nothing about programming.

PS. The topic you brought up has nothing to do with the art of
programming. That shouldn't surprise anyone. I'll try to explain it
to Robbie as simply as possible. What you mentioned is
called "application specific" jargon. There are probably a trillions
of lines of code that have been developed for millions of
applications. No programmer knows the application specific jargon
unless they programmed the application. There is a BIG difference
between coding/design skills and application skills. The former is
what we were discussing and what determines a good or bad programmer,
the latter is what you provided in your question. Now, don't you feel
really stupid ... again?

···

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

Is THAT what happened to you? You were "put out to pasture". Don't
you just love it when Rob's projection tells us about his past.

RETIRED EARLY happens often at IBM. They hire geek after geek, they
don't allow beards (perfect for geeks cause most of them have that
sissified skin) and they keep plenty of pastures for the neurotic.
Now who worked for them? HeHeHaHaHoHo!!!
    

> So the punch card era comment really got to you I see.....More
proof
> of how the truth does hurt. Oh, and I'll ask you one of your Mr.
> Wizard questions too--Explain the nine required coding variables
for
> F-16 and F-15 primary communications encryption, why four of

those

> variables cannot be used in the F-18, and how your so-
> called "intelligent agents" has nothing to do with the secure
> infrastructure of that type of communications system. And here's

a

> hint since you'll undoubtedly claim the information's secret: It
> isn't and has never been. This type of programming is also used

in

> commercial business communications.

Translation: Rob has no idea how answer my question because he

knows absolutely nothing about programming.

Too many colloquialisms = too much nerd embarrassment. What happened
to "ROTFLMAOOA"? That one's missed. OK, as if you were gonna let the
topic go when it would make you look even dumber if you did.....let's
check out your latest face-saving effort then, I'm so sorry, but
you'll have to suffer through more factual evidence that even when
your shaken into stammering out a reply that argues another Singer
home run by exposing your phoniness, you still have that continual
trouble neurotically trying to "set the record straight":

No programmer knows the application specific jargon
unless they programmed the application. There is a BIG difference
between coding/design skills and application skills.

Did I call it or what! Any programmer--and we all know they're a dime
a dozen out there--can claim they know nothing about specific
applications, but you my friend were tricked into saying that while
exposing your main flaw once again--LYING ABOUT YOUR SO-CALLED
ABILITY while believing you put the words together in your own mind
to cover it all up. And I suppose you do that to impress all the
weenies on the vp forums who are so encouraged by your dereliction
and pathological gambling.
I knew you'd get perturbed by my bringing up actual application
related software issues, so you predictably got lost in your own BS.
Remember your "intelligent agents" comment? Every REAL software
engineer knows why those parameters are left out of encryption. In
fact it's taught in college--did you ever really go??

Hint: Here's where Dick spends HOURS researching some answer on the
Internet to cover his butt....when he and everyone else knows he
should cut his losses right now. But I welcome his lack of dignity
and, in fact, ENJOY it!

···

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

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

> Is THAT what happened to you? You were "put out to pasture".

Don't

> you just love it when Rob's projection tells us about his past.

RETIRED EARLY happens often at IBM. They hire geek after geek, they
don't allow beards (perfect for geeks cause most of them have that
sissified skin) and they keep plenty of pastures for the neurotic.
Now who worked for them? HeHeHaHaHoHo!!!

IBM has allowed beards for many, many years. You just can't stop
yourself from making one foolish statement after another.

> > So the punch card era comment really got to you I see.....More
> proof
> > of how the truth does hurt. Oh, and I'll ask you one of your

Mr.

> > Wizard questions too--Explain the nine required coding

variables

> for
> > F-16 and F-15 primary communications encryption, why four of
those
> > variables cannot be used in the F-18, and how your so-
> > called "intelligent agents" has nothing to do with the secure
> > infrastructure of that type of communications system. And

here's

a
> > hint since you'll undoubtedly claim the information's secret:

It

> > isn't and has never been. This type of programming is also used
in
> > commercial business communications.
>
> Translation: Rob has no idea how answer my question because he
knows absolutely nothing about programming.

Too many colloquialisms = too much nerd embarrassment. What

happened

to "ROTFLMAOOA"? That one's missed. OK, as if you were gonna let

the

topic go when it would make you look even dumber if you

did.....let's

check out your latest face-saving effort then, I'm so sorry, but
you'll have to suffer through more factual evidence that even when
your shaken into stammering out a reply that argues another Singer
home run by exposing your phoniness, you still have that continual
trouble neurotically trying to "set the record straight":

I guess you must have typed all that worthless dribble before reading
on where I explained just how stupid your response was. But then, I
suspect my "simple" explanation probably went right over your head.

> No programmer knows the application specific jargon
> unless they programmed the application. There is a BIG difference
> between coding/design skills and application skills.

Did I call it or what! Any programmer--and we all know they're a

dime

a dozen out there--can claim they know nothing about specific
applications, but you my friend were tricked into saying that while
exposing your main flaw once again--LYING ABOUT YOUR SO-CALLED
ABILITY while believing you put the words together in your own mind
to cover it all up. And I suppose you do that to impress all the
weenies on the vp forums who are so encouraged by your dereliction
and pathological gambling.
I knew you'd get perturbed by my bringing up actual application
related software issues, so you predictably got lost in your own

BS.

Remember your "intelligent agents" comment? Every REAL software
engineer knows why those parameters are left out of encryption. In
fact it's taught in college--did you ever really go??

I'm still waiting for you to explain OO deisgn concepts ... how about
multiple inheritance, classes, templates, etc. Come on Robbie, if you
know so much let's hear it.

Of course, your long-winded response pretty much explains why we'll
never see an answer from you. You are a complete idiot about
programming and clearly never had any programmers work for you. So,
chalk up another proven lie to your long list.

PS. I threw in "intelligent agents" as a test. Unlike OO techniques,
IAs are simply a class of applications that have similar
characteristics. They were never taught when you and I went to
college because the term did not even exist. You obviously haven't
the slightest idea what they are. They have no special relationship
to encryption either, so all you did above was prove to any
knowledgeable person that you haven't got a clue.

Oh, and to those who are getting adept at reading your "projections",
this one was extremely telling.

Hint: Here's where Dick spends HOURS researching some answer on the
Internet to cover his butt....when he and everyone else knows he
should cut his losses right now. But I welcome his lack of dignity
and, in fact, ENJOY it!

So, you spent hours researching and you still couldn't come up with
an intelligent response. Waaaaaaaaay tooooooooooo funny.

···

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

IBM has allowed beards for many, many years. You just can't stop
yourself from making one foolish statement after another.

Your era, Dick. Your era. And that was decades ago!

I'm still waiting for you to explain OO deisgn concepts ... how

about multiple inheritance, classes, templates, etc. Come on Robbie,
if you know so much let's hear it.

Spending time on the Internet researching again, are we??! I'd rather
sip my JD Single Barrel than do that--wouldn't you? Oh! Wait a
minute!! You're having a hard time tonight because you won't go to a
casino with all the cool people in them. You need geeks and nerds to
make you feel comfortable--like all the lowlife fat ass "advantage
players" who sit at those FPDW machines at Sam's Town. Come to think
of it, aren't they roping all you losers in with 8X points tonight?
There's nothing better than watching a pack of life's leftovers
playing quarters thinking they're "playing with an edge" over a
casino that reels losers like them in whenever they choose to!

Of course, your long-winded response pretty much explains why we'll
never see an answer from you. You are a complete idiot about
programming and clearly never had any programmers work for you. So,
chalk up another proven lie to your long list.

Programming isn't my bag because I'm no geek, and I hired & fired
those bozos like chimps in zoo acts. But it's clear I have WAAAY more
knowledge & background than you because I actually designed the
systems and determined what was required for SW to make it operate
the way I wanted it to. Then in came you chumps and jumped to my
whip, you know, just like you do here. You'da been perfect.

PS. I threw in "intelligent agents" as a test. Unlike OO

techniques,

IAs are simply a class of applications that have similar
characteristics. They were never taught when you and I went to
college because the term did not even exist. You obviously haven't
the slightest idea what they are. They have no special relationship
to encryption either, so all you did above was prove to any
knowledgeable person that you haven't got a clue.

All you're doing is digging yourself a bigger hole. It was not only
introduced to me in college classes--those of us who had real jobs
requiring software application were behooved to update their
knowledge & skills in continuing education classes thru work. In my
case it was absolutely essential. Looks to me like you winged this
one too.

So, you spent hours researching and you still couldn't come up with
an intelligent response. Waaaaaaaaay tooooooooooo funny.

Do you ever tire of being my parrot?? Please don't laugh too much
though--it'll toss that big belly around enough to cause more upset!

···

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

Might as well start the year off right, with my first Undeniable
Truth Article of 2008! You won't read anything like it by the second
tier famous names because I'm not shamelessly promoting myself for
the sake of sales....and, I tell the TRUTH. Refreshing, isn't it.
Then if you have the stomach, compare it to another monotonous,
repitious meaningless article by Elliot Fromm. At least he didn't
bore us this week with another pitch to buy his stupid pamphlets or
strategy cards, etc., but I see the nonsense coming.....

Seven Years Of Good Luck
by Rob Singer
Tuesday, January 1, 2008

As we all celebrate the arrival of 2008, many of us will also take
the time to look back at the year that just ended and try to find the
good that came out of it for us as individuals. For some that can be
scary – and yes, I've been there. But for others, such a review is
good reason to look upon the coming year with revitalized hope and
anticipation, and that is where I am now.

As a professional gambler, the outlook for the next year is generally
based on how much confidence one can take with them as they cross
over the Dec. 31st border. After all, winning money is the most
important thing in this profession – or is it?

I'm sure there's all types of opinions out there, but today I'm going
to share mine. Certainly, taking money from the casinos ranks high on
my list, and I've done it consistently well without all the
associated fluff that others like to feed us. But as complicated as
my video poker play strategies seem to be to many, I've made it an
absolute necessity to simplify the overall process of playing to win.

One of my major goals each year has always been to spend as little
time as possible playing the game in order to reach my goals. Why?
Well, it's obviously not that I don't like casinos. They're
entertaining, spectacular, exciting, and very provocative. And while
they do promote basic unhealthy habits for those who choose to visit
them often or on a near-daily basis, I look at them as a means to an
end above all else.

There was also a time in my playing life when I didn't know any
better, and I spent every moment home from overseas travel inside
casinos in Laughlin and Las Vegas from 1990-1996. As an advantage
player, I just knew the more I played the sooner I would attain what
the writers of the game said they did.

That myth never materialized, and in fact I lost nearly $50,000 in my
final year as an "optimal player". 1996 was further jinxed because I
also got involved in a large financial snafu having nothing to do
with the game. But when the New Year struck on Jan. 1, 1997 the tides
were beginning to change.

For most of 1997, 1998 & 1999 I played my own developed strategy
whenever I was home, and for a change I found myself on the positive
side of the ledger each year. All my other administrative troubles
were far behind me now, so after having saved up the proper gambling
bankroll and having secured my financial future, I decided to quit
Corporate America to become a full-time video poker player.

As life-changing choices go, I couldn't have done better. Playing
video poker for "a living" has shown a very health profit each and
every year since. It's not that I'm making obscene and gigantic
killings every year – just reasonable wins based on reasonable win
goals, totally unrelated to greed.

But the winning's not the main plus gleaned from my decision to leave
my job for the opportunity to gamble. There's actually several other
much more important aspects of making such a change. First and
foremost there's my family. While I am in nearby Nevada on a regular
basis, I am home FAR more often now than I ever was during my working
career. Stand-alone, that is priceless in worth.

An unexpected successful aspect of my efforts in video poker has been
my ability to get my common sense based words out to the video poker
community. I'm all about helping other players become less frustrated
with the game and hopefully winning gamblers – and I've invested a
lot of time and money in making that come true.

One way I do that is via my website. Another is through my books. But
the most effective method I've had in helping other players realize
their mistakes and how they've been misled by what's out there is
through this column.

Today marks my 7th straight year writing the Undeniable Truth column
for Gaming Today. It has allowed many players across the country to
get a side of the story rarely seen prior to 2001, and it has meant
many acquaintances, tons of meaningful correspondence, and even some
close friends hopefully for life.

It has, in short, been 7 years of very good luck. That type of good
fortune is seldom seen in the gambling world, yet if many people took
the time to look at their overall picture instead of just at their
gambling results, they could be there too. Good luck to everyone in
2008!

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

> IBM has allowed beards for many, many years. You just can't stop
> yourself from making one foolish statement after another.

Your era, Dick. Your era. And that was decades ago!

Decade to be specific. However, a couple of months ago I talked with
an employee who has had a beard for many years. Try again.

> I'm still waiting for you to explain OO deisgn concepts ... how
about multiple inheritance, classes, templates, etc. Come on

Robbie,

if you know so much let's hear it.

Spending time on the Internet researching again, are we??! I'd

rather

sip my JD Single Barrel than do that--wouldn't you? Oh! Wait a
minute!! You're having a hard time tonight because you won't go to

a

casino with all the cool people in them. You need geeks and nerds

to

make you feel comfortable--like all the lowlife fat ass "advantage
players" who sit at those FPDW machines at Sam's Town. Come to

think

of it, aren't they roping all you losers in with 8X points tonight?
There's nothing better than watching a pack of life's leftovers
playing quarters thinking they're "playing with an edge" over a
casino that reels losers like them in whenever they choose to!

Didn't I say Rob wouldn't have a clue, instead he attempts to change
the subject once again. Feeling a little caged in at the moment,
Robbie?

> Of course, your long-winded response pretty much explains why

we'll

> never see an answer from you. You are a complete idiot about
> programming and clearly never had any programmers work for you.

So,

> chalk up another proven lie to your long list.

Programming isn't my bag because I'm no geek, and I hired & fired
those bozos like chimps in zoo acts. But it's clear I have WAAAY

more

knowledge & background than you because I actually designed the
systems and determined what was required for SW to make it operate
the way I wanted it to. Then in came you chumps and jumped to my
whip, you know, just like you do here. You'da been perfect.

What can I add to such an obvious lie. You make this way too easy.

> PS. I threw in "intelligent agents" as a test. Unlike OO
techniques,
> IAs are simply a class of applications that have similar
> characteristics. They were never taught when you and I went to
> college because the term did not even exist. You obviously

haven't

> the slightest idea what they are. They have no special

relationship

> to encryption either, so all you did above was prove to any
> knowledgeable person that you haven't got a clue.

All you're doing is digging yourself a bigger hole. It was not only
introduced to me in college classes--those of us who had real jobs
requiring software application were behooved to update their
knowledge & skills in continuing education classes thru work. In my
case it was absolutely essential. Looks to me like you winged this
one too.

They were taught to him and yet he can't describe what they are. Do
you really think you can fool anyone with this BS?

BTW, "intelligent agents" operate best in a peer-peer network, you
know, something like the internet. Tell us about all your internet
experience in college.

> So, you spent hours researching and you still couldn't come up

with

> an intelligent response. Waaaaaaaaay tooooooooooo funny.

Do you ever tire of being my parrot?? Please don't laugh too much
though--it'll toss that big belly around enough to cause more upset!

Well, you're right about one thing. I have been laughing "too much".
Time to head out to the casinos to start a new year. My final numbers
are in for 2007 and it was a record win once again.

···

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

Decade to be specific. However, a couple of months ago I talked

with an employee who has had a beard for many years. Try again.

I just talked to one in NY today. No beards allowed there! Even today.
Guess you'll have to make something else up again.
  

Didn't I say Rob wouldn't have a clue, instead he attempts to

change the subject once again. Feeling a little caged in at the
moment, Robbie?

I can always tell when you're angry by how often you use the
term "Robbie". It's like Meldrone using my old "bankruptcy" or your
easily rattled friend 2wild using "projection". Yum yum I eat all
that up!
  

> Programming isn't my bag because I'm no geek, and I hired & fired
> those bozos like chimps in zoo acts. But it's clear I have WAAAY
more
> knowledge & background than you because I actually designed the
> systems and determined what was required for SW to make it

operate

> the way I wanted it to. Then in came you chumps and jumped to my
> whip, you know, just like you do here. You'da been perfect.

What can I add to such an obvious lie. You make this way too easy.

You can add "you're right and I'm a fool" and I think that'll end
your embarrassment once and for all! but please don't--I love
whipping you around the Internet!!
  

> All you're doing is digging yourself a bigger hole. It was not

only

> introduced to me in college classes--those of us who had real

jobs

> requiring software application were behooved to update their
> knowledge & skills in continuing education classes thru work. In

my

> case it was absolutely essential. Looks to me like you winged

this

> one too.

They were taught to him and yet he can't describe what they are. Do
you really think you can fool anyone with this BS?

Let's see....I don't remember a thing about FIFO either. Geeks are
geeks and normal people are normal. And I love it! (Gimmee another
sip of holiday cheer! while Dick runs out to his nearest 8X points
casino!
  

Well, you're right about one thing. I have been laughing "too

much". Time to head out to the casinos to start a new year. My final
numbers are in for 2007 and it was a record win once again.

Don't forget to check the scale before you go out--record numbers
there too! It happens when all you do is sit at machines hour after
hour every day!

···

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

It's nice to see an actual RS article copied to this message board
because, like his Christmas message here (goodwill to all), it shows
how two-faced he is. We see the real Argentino, and the public sees
the manipulating Singer.

Here's how the article should read ...

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

Might as well start the year off right, with my first Undeniable
Truth Article of 2008! You won't read anything like it by the

second

tier famous names because I'm not shamelessly promoting myself for
the sake of sales....and, I tell the TRUTH.

But I am shamelessly promoting myself and will lie to do so.

Refreshing, isn't it.

Like a bowel movement :slight_smile:

Then if you have the stomach, compare it to another monotonous,
repitious meaningless article by Elliot Fromm. At least he didn't
bore us this week with another pitch to buy his stupid pamphlets or
strategy cards, etc., but I see the nonsense coming.....

I hate Elliot because he has credibility and the message of his
column completely contradicts mine. How come Keno Lil doesn't get a
counterpoint writer? Bitch.

Seven Years Of Good Luck
by Rob Singer
Tuesday, January 1, 2008

Seven Years of Lies

As we all celebrate the arrival of 2008, many of us will also take
the time to look back at the year that just ended and try to find

the

good that came out of it for us as individuals.

Most people can easily find the good, but for me it's a struggle. If
I can't find it, I'll just pretend I did.

For some that can be

scary – and yes, I've been there.

Thank God for booze.

But for others, such a review is

good reason to look upon the coming year with revitalized hope and
anticipation, and that is where I am now.

After this stinking year, things can only get better.

As a professional gambler, the outlook for the next year is

generally

based on how much confidence one can take with them as they cross
over the Dec. 31st border. After all, winning money is the most
important thing in this profession – or is it?

Most people need money to gamble and win, but all I need is
confidence to lie and pretend I'm a winner.

I'm sure there's all types of opinions out there, but today I'm

going

to share mine. Certainly, taking money from the casinos ranks high

on

my list, and I've done it consistently well without all the
associated fluff that others like to feed us.

Actually high on my list is taking money and other benefits from
players ... and I'm pretty good at it if I can get a face-to-face.
PLEASE contact me!

But as complicated as

my video poker play strategies seem to be to many, I've made it an
absolute necessity to simplify the overall process of playing to

win.

I know this makes absolutely no sense, but it sounds good, so I'll
just leave it in.

One of my major goals each year has always been to spend as little
time as possible playing the game in order to reach my goals. Why?

#1 I don't have the money and #2 my goal is to get whatever I can
from the losers who seek my help.

Well, it's obviously not that I don't like casinos. They're
entertaining, spectacular, exciting, and very provocative. And

while

they do promote basic unhealthy habits for those who choose to

visit

them often or on a near-daily basis, I look at them as a means to

an

end above all else.

Casino drinking really accelerated by losing back in the old days and
it continues to hurt me today in other ways. My "end" is conning and
manipulating players for fun and profit. Note the word "fun". Those
who know the real me from message boards know I take particular
delight in abusing and hurting anyone who gets in my way.

> There was also a time in my playing life when I didn't know any

better, and I spent every moment home from overseas travel inside
casinos in Laughlin and Las Vegas from 1990-1996.

Ehh ... the "home from overseas" bit is a stretch, but it downplays
the severity of my gambling addiction and makes me sound worldly and
important, so it stays.

As an advantage

player, I just knew the more I played the sooner I would attain

what

the writers of the game said they did.

Actually I was a typical loser. I didn't have the patience,
discipline, knowledge, or bankroll to play VP for fun and profit.
Naturally the more I played, the more I lost. It was much easier to
blame the writers than blame myself.

That myth never materialized, and in fact I lost nearly $50,000 in

my

final year as an "optimal player".

My play was optimal to lose even more and only heavy borrowing kept
me in action until then.

1996 was further jinxed because I

also got involved in a large financial snafu having nothing to do
with the game.

When I finally got cornered by creditors, I filed for bankruptcy.

But when the New Year struck on Jan. 1, 1997 the tides

were beginning to change.

For most of 1997, 1998 & 1999 I played my own developed strategy
whenever I was home, and for a change I found myself on the

positive

side of the ledger each year.

As a salesman, I got pretty good at reading and manipulating people,
and after studying up on known gambling cons, it was pretty simple to
apply that knowledge and set up a con to hustle VP players ... and
hide income. Even more for ME!

All my other administrative troubles

were far behind me now,

Well, I still owed at least $40K that was not forgiven, but I quickly
put that far behind me. Suckers!

so after having saved up the proper gambling

bankroll and having secured my financial future, I decided to quit
Corporate America to become a full-time video poker player.

The public opinion was that I was fired for offenses related to
gambling, but as recently "projected," I was actually "put out to
pasture" and retired early.

As life-changing choices go, I couldn't have done better. Playing
video poker for "a living" has shown a very health profit each and
every year since. It's not that I'm making obscene and gigantic
killings every year – just reasonable wins based on reasonable win
goals, totally unrelated to greed.

My con went pretty good for awhile, but Dancer, Scott etc. educated
thousands of players on how to play properly and that just about
wiped me out. Thank God, I can still write a newspaper column to get
my message out. Even so, the "loser" market is drying up. Damn them
all to hell!

But the winning's not the main plus gleaned from my decision to

leave

my job for the opportunity to gamble. There's actually several

other

much more important aspects of making such a change. First and
foremost there's my family.

I'm a sociopath, so my personal life is pretty much a shambles, and
my drinking just makes matters worse. But "family" is a buzzword
that resonates with the masses, so I've got to mention it.

While I am in nearby Nevada on a regular

basis, I am home FAR more often now than I ever was during my

working

career. Stand-alone, that is priceless in worth.

I've got no choice. I'm low on money ... and my con is losing steam.

An unexpected successful aspect of my efforts in video poker has

been

my ability to get my common sense based words out to the video

poker

community. I'm all about helping other players become less

frustrated

with the game and hopefully winning gamblers – and I've invested a
lot of time and money in making that come true.

I've been banned or restricted everywhere because I'm an obvious
sociopath with a message that common sense can overcome math. No
surprise that I'm only fooling the biggest losers nowadays.

I used to try to charm the mainstream players, but Dick and his
cronies have made such a fool of me that I've just given up and let
everyone see the real me. This column is the only thing that keeps
me going and if clueless GT ever figures out I'm just a con man, that
will be the end. Christ, I may have to get a job.

One way I do that is via my website. Another is through my books.

But

the most effective method I've had in helping other players realize
their mistakes and how they've been misled by what's out there is
through this column.

Amen ... I need to get the word out to more marks. Unfortunately,
the web site draws no traffic, my books have never sold, and everyone
ridicules my column. Gotta keep my confidence ... gotta keep my
confidence.

Today marks my 7th straight year writing the Undeniable Truth

column

for Gaming Today. It has allowed many players across the country to
get a side of the story rarely seen prior to 2001, and it has meant
many acquaintances, tons of meaningful correspondence, and even

some

close friends hopefully for life.

What little correspondence I get is negative. And because I'm only
in friendships to take advantage, I don't have any close or lasting
friendships. Who needs 'em anyway!

It has, in short, been 7 years of very good luck. That type of good
fortune is seldom seen in the gambling world, yet if many people

took

the time to look at their overall picture instead of just at their
gambling results, they could be there too.

As I said before, you don't need gambling results, all you need is
confidence. And not having a conscience really helps too, so there's
none of that confidence-losing guilt, empathy, shame, and all those
other loser emotions.

Good luck to everyone in

2008!

Good luck to ME in 2008! The hell with you!

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

> Decade to be specific. However, a couple of months ago I talked
with an employee who has had a beard for many years. Try again.

I just talked to one in NY today. No beards allowed there! Even

today.

Guess you'll have to make something else up again.

There may be specific areas where beards are discouraged. I could see
it in areas with significant customer contact ... sales,
headquarters, service, etc. Not the case in development where I
worked. So, your assertion is still wrong. Like I said before ... try
again.

> Didn't I say Rob wouldn't have a clue, instead he attempts to
change the subject once again. Feeling a little caged in at the
moment, Robbie?

I can always tell when you're angry by how often you use the
term "Robbie". It's like Meldrone using my old "bankruptcy" or your
easily rattled friend 2wild using "projection". Yum yum I eat all
that up!

Yup. It appears using Robbie is getting to you. Your "projection"
says it all. However, I use Robbie when you are acting childish
(which is most of the time). If you don't like it, grow up.

> > Programming isn't my bag because I'm no geek, and I hired &

fired

> > those bozos like chimps in zoo acts. But it's clear I have

WAAAY

> more
> > knowledge & background than you because I actually designed the
> > systems and determined what was required for SW to make it
operate
> > the way I wanted it to. Then in came you chumps and jumped to

my

> > whip, you know, just like you do here. You'da been perfect.
>
> What can I add to such an obvious lie. You make this way too easy.

You can add "you're right and I'm a fool" and I think that'll end
your embarrassment once and for all! but please don't--I love
whipping you around the Internet!!

Let us know when you plan to start. All you're doing now is scrambing
around making a complete fool of yourself.

> > All you're doing is digging yourself a bigger hole. It was not
only
> > introduced to me in college classes--those of us who had real
jobs
> > requiring software application were behooved to update their
> > knowledge & skills in continuing education classes thru work.

In

my
> > case it was absolutely essential. Looks to me like you winged
this
> > one too.
>
> They were taught to him and yet he can't describe what they are.

Do

> you really think you can fool anyone with this BS?

Let's see....I don't remember a thing about FIFO either. Geeks are
geeks and normal people are normal. And I love it! (Gimmee another
sip of holiday cheer! while Dick runs out to his nearest 8X points
casino!

Translation: Robbie has no answer. He has no clue about programming
nor does he understand any of the terms. Yet, he is still trying to
convince us he understands something. LMAO.

> Well, you're right about one thing. I have been laughing "too
much". Time to head out to the casinos to start a new year. My

final

numbers are in for 2007 and it was a record win once again.

Don't forget to check the scale before you go out--record numbers
there too! It happens when all you do is sit at machines hour after
hour every day!

I doubt sitting at a machine would put a single pound on anyone. No
calories there. In fact, I seem to remember that eating had something
to do with putting on weight. So, please explain to everyone how "it
happens".

BTW, I just got back from my daily workout before I answered your
silly posts. Yup, Robbie is completely off-track yet again. Maybe you
need to get those "gleans" of yours repaired. ROTFLMAO yet again.

···

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

It's nice to see an actual RS article copied to this message board
because, like his Christmas message here (goodwill to all), it

shows how two-faced he is. We see the real Argentino, and the public
sees the manipulating Singer.

Most people, including me, won't take the time to read about your
frustrating envy. HOWEVER, it is very satisfying to see how much time
you put into doing whatever you did here - and thank you! You are
part of the Singer family and you should consider yourself lucky to
be manipulated by such a famous vp professional as well as having me
100% inside your head at all times!!

Isn't life GREAT!

Here's how the article should read ...

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@> wrote:
>
> Might as well start the year off right, with my first Undeniable
> Truth Article of 2008! You won't read anything like it by the
second
> tier famous names because I'm not shamelessly promoting myself

for

> the sake of sales....and, I tell the TRUTH.

But I am shamelessly promoting myself and will lie to do so.

Refreshing, isn't it.

Like a bowel movement :slight_smile:

> Then if you have the stomach, compare it to another monotonous,
> repitious meaningless article by Elliot Fromm. At least he didn't
> bore us this week with another pitch to buy his stupid pamphlets

or

> strategy cards, etc., but I see the nonsense coming.....

I hate Elliot because he has credibility and the message of his
column completely contradicts mine. How come Keno Lil doesn't get

a

counterpoint writer? Bitch.

> Seven Years Of Good Luck
> by Rob Singer
> Tuesday, January 1, 2008

Seven Years of Lies

> As we all celebrate the arrival of 2008, many of us will also

take

> the time to look back at the year that just ended and try to find
the
> good that came out of it for us as individuals.

Most people can easily find the good, but for me it's a struggle.

If

I can't find it, I'll just pretend I did.

For some that can be
> scary – and yes, I've been there.

Thank God for booze.

But for others, such a review is
> good reason to look upon the coming year with revitalized hope

and

> anticipation, and that is where I am now.

After this stinking year, things can only get better.

> As a professional gambler, the outlook for the next year is
generally
> based on how much confidence one can take with them as they cross
> over the Dec. 31st border. After all, winning money is the most
> important thing in this profession – or is it?

Most people need money to gamble and win, but all I need is
confidence to lie and pretend I'm a winner.

> I'm sure there's all types of opinions out there, but today I'm
going
> to share mine. Certainly, taking money from the casinos ranks

high

on
> my list, and I've done it consistently well without all the
> associated fluff that others like to feed us.

Actually high on my list is taking money and other benefits from
players ... and I'm pretty good at it if I can get a face-to-face.
PLEASE contact me!

But as complicated as
> my video poker play strategies seem to be to many, I've made it

an

> absolute necessity to simplify the overall process of playing to
win.

I know this makes absolutely no sense, but it sounds good, so I'll
just leave it in.

> One of my major goals each year has always been to spend as

little

> time as possible playing the game in order to reach my goals.

Why?

#1 I don't have the money and #2 my goal is to get whatever I can
from the losers who seek my help.

> Well, it's obviously not that I don't like casinos. They're
> entertaining, spectacular, exciting, and very provocative. And
while
> they do promote basic unhealthy habits for those who choose to
visit
> them often or on a near-daily basis, I look at them as a means to
an
> end above all else.

Casino drinking really accelerated by losing back in the old days

and

it continues to hurt me today in other ways. My "end" is conning

and

manipulating players for fun and profit. Note the word "fun".

Those

who know the real me from message boards know I take particular
delight in abusing and hurting anyone who gets in my way.

> There was also a time in my playing life when I didn't know any
> better, and I spent every moment home from overseas travel inside
> casinos in Laughlin and Las Vegas from 1990-1996.

Ehh ... the "home from overseas" bit is a stretch, but it downplays
the severity of my gambling addiction and makes me sound worldly

and

important, so it stays.

As an advantage
> player, I just knew the more I played the sooner I would attain
what
> the writers of the game said they did.

Actually I was a typical loser. I didn't have the patience,
discipline, knowledge, or bankroll to play VP for fun and profit.
Naturally the more I played, the more I lost. It was much easier

to

blame the writers than blame myself.

> That myth never materialized, and in fact I lost nearly $50,000

in

my
> final year as an "optimal player".

My play was optimal to lose even more and only heavy borrowing kept
me in action until then.

1996 was further jinxed because I
> also got involved in a large financial snafu having nothing to do
> with the game.

When I finally got cornered by creditors, I filed for bankruptcy.

But when the New Year struck on Jan. 1, 1997 the tides
> were beginning to change.
>
> For most of 1997, 1998 & 1999 I played my own developed strategy
> whenever I was home, and for a change I found myself on the
positive
> side of the ledger each year.

As a salesman, I got pretty good at reading and manipulating

people,

and after studying up on known gambling cons, it was pretty simple

to

apply that knowledge and set up a con to hustle VP players ... and
hide income. Even more for ME!

All my other administrative troubles
> were far behind me now,

Well, I still owed at least $40K that was not forgiven, but I

quickly

put that far behind me. Suckers!

so after having saved up the proper gambling
> bankroll and having secured my financial future, I decided to

quit

> Corporate America to become a full-time video poker player.

The public opinion was that I was fired for offenses related to
gambling, but as recently "projected," I was actually "put out to
pasture" and retired early.

> As life-changing choices go, I couldn't have done better. Playing
> video poker for "a living" has shown a very health profit each

and

> every year since. It's not that I'm making obscene and gigantic
> killings every year – just reasonable wins based on reasonable

win

> goals, totally unrelated to greed.

My con went pretty good for awhile, but Dancer, Scott etc. educated
thousands of players on how to play properly and that just about
wiped me out. Thank God, I can still write a newspaper column to

get

my message out. Even so, the "loser" market is drying up. Damn

them

all to hell!

> But the winning's not the main plus gleaned from my decision to
leave
> my job for the opportunity to gamble. There's actually several
other
> much more important aspects of making such a change. First and
> foremost there's my family.

I'm a sociopath, so my personal life is pretty much a shambles,

and

my drinking just makes matters worse. But "family" is a buzzword
that resonates with the masses, so I've got to mention it.

While I am in nearby Nevada on a regular
> basis, I am home FAR more often now than I ever was during my
working
> career. Stand-alone, that is priceless in worth.

I've got no choice. I'm low on money ... and my con is losing

steam.

> An unexpected successful aspect of my efforts in video poker has
been
> my ability to get my common sense based words out to the video
poker
> community. I'm all about helping other players become less
frustrated
> with the game and hopefully winning gamblers – and I've invested

a

> lot of time and money in making that come true.

I've been banned or restricted everywhere because I'm an obvious
sociopath with a message that common sense can overcome math. No
surprise that I'm only fooling the biggest losers nowadays.

I used to try to charm the mainstream players, but Dick and his
cronies have made such a fool of me that I've just given up and let
everyone see the real me. This column is the only thing that keeps
me going and if clueless GT ever figures out I'm just a con man,

that

will be the end. Christ, I may have to get a job.

> One way I do that is via my website. Another is through my books.
But
> the most effective method I've had in helping other players

realize

> their mistakes and how they've been misled by what's out there is
> through this column.

Amen ... I need to get the word out to more marks. Unfortunately,
the web site draws no traffic, my books have never sold, and

everyone

ridicules my column. Gotta keep my confidence ... gotta keep my
confidence.

> Today marks my 7th straight year writing the Undeniable Truth
column
> for Gaming Today. It has allowed many players across the country

to

> get a side of the story rarely seen prior to 2001, and it has

meant

> many acquaintances, tons of meaningful correspondence, and even
some
> close friends hopefully for life.

What little correspondence I get is negative. And because I'm only
in friendships to take advantage, I don't have any close or lasting
friendships. Who needs 'em anyway!

> It has, in short, been 7 years of very good luck. That type of

good

> fortune is seldom seen in the gambling world, yet if many people
took
> the time to look at their overall picture instead of just at

their

> gambling results, they could be there too.

As I said before, you don't need gambling results, all you need is
confidence. And not having a conscience really helps too, so

there's

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "2-WILD" <lucky4K@...> wrote:

none of that confidence-losing guilt, empathy, shame, and all those
other loser emotions.

Good luck to everyone in
> 2008!

Good luck to ME in 2008! The hell with you!

There may be specific areas where beards are discouraged. I could

see

it in areas with significant customer contact ... sales,
headquarters, service, etc. Not the case in development where I
worked. So, your assertion is still wrong. Like I said before ...

try again.

Oh man, are you hurt by my logic and facts or WHAT!! All that blah
blah blah to try and cover up your dwindling knowledge of the
workplace you spent time in. See what happens when you spend too much
time in casinos and too much time losing??
   

However, I use Robbie when you are acting childish (which is most of

the time). If you don't like it, grow up.

Oh please don't get me wrong my friend. I love it! It says the same
as "I'm at my boiling point and you did it to me AGAIN!"

Translation: Robbie has no answer. He has no clue about programming
nor does he understand any of the terms. Yet, he is still trying to
convince us he understands something. LMAO.

And why would a former engineering boss need to recollect everything
about programming--something I hired weenies like you to do. I gave
you one specific item on fighter aircraft software and you ran away
from it faster than Bob Dancer sneaking out of the house in the
middle of the night to go play the $100 machines so Shirley can't
stop him.
  

> Don't forget to check the scale before you go out--record numbers
> there too! It happens when all you do is sit at machines hour

after hour every day!

I doubt sitting at a machine would put a single pound on anyone. No
calories there. In fact, I seem to remember that eating had

something to do with putting on weight. So, please explain to
everyone how "it happens".

OK, certainly. You eat, and instead of jogging or walking or working
out or hiking or riding a bike, you choose to sit at the machines for
hours. GET THE PICTURE of how to be F-A-T yet? Duh!!

BTW, I just got back from my daily workout before I answered your
silly posts. Yup, Robbie is completely off-track yet again. Maybe

you need to get those "gleans" of yours repaired. ROTFLMAO yet again.

Oh of course....and did they have any challenging machines in the
geriatric ward? Hohohohehehehahaha!!!

···

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

robsinger1111 wrote:

Might as well start the year off right, with my first Undeniable
Truth Article of 2008! You won't read anything like it by the second
tier famous names because I'm not shamelessly promoting myself for
the sake of sales....and, I tell the TRUTH.

Hey, Rob, Happy New Year to you and your wife and the very best wishes
from Bev and me!

You know I regard you and your approach to play with a measured
respect (something that has drawn a little eye rolling in my direction
from those who otherwise hold respect for me). I consider the basics
of your strategy entirely rational for those who hold both goals and a
bent towards play that is consistent with it.

As such, I find the "Undeniable Truth" to be that there are viable
alternatives to the gospel of "advantage play" preached by those you
derisively refer to as "the experts". Beyond that, however, I find
that in your enthusiasm you're prone to much of the same "best thing
since sliced bread" hyperbole that the Dancers, Scotts, etc. are apt
to fall into -- perhaps a little more so.

Within your writings you give due voice to the inherent risks of your
play and the needs for a substantial bankroll to aggressively pursue
it. However, that voice is muted by a steady beat that suggests it's
a sure path to a winning season when compared to advantage play.

While you can't be held responsible for how others may digest and
interpret what you write, I find in those who embrace your writings an
uncomfortable tendency to do so out of frustration with their own
experience with advantage play rather than out of a leaning toward the
rational aspects of your approach. In other words, what they
principally latch onto isn't the merits of your strategy but instead
your disdain for the grind-it-out advantage play approach (as promoted
by the "famous names" - top tier and those with lesser presence). I
see your unfortunate steady vociferous rant of disdain against "the
experts" as a pandering to this attraction by others.

···

------

I applaud your writing to the extent that it calls "the experts" on
aspects of their own writing that has more in common with propaganda
than it does fact. While they do an excellent job in laying out a map
of what advantage play is about -- in particular the benefits and the
risks -- the risks are downplayed in favor of a trumpeted message of
"You too can be a Winner!" ... leading many players to have a
distorted perception of their own prospects for success when weighed
against the specific manner in which they apply the precepts put
forth. (In all honesty, Rob, your discussions of your own "advantage
play" days speak loudly to this possibly being as aspect of your own
experience.)

But I'd find what your write much more admirable if, instead of
finding "advantage play" a folly, you wrote of it as a viable approach
-- just not the holy grail of video poker and inappropriate for those
whose goals differ from those for which advantage play is best suited.

Bev's and my own play this last weekend was an archetype of everything
about advantage play that you find ludicrous. In our first hour of
play Bev hit a royal and we were both enthusiastic that we looked to
bring home some portion of the win. As it turned out we blew every
penny and half again as much before calling it a trip.

I grasp that this is a result you would find entirely unsatisfactory
were it yours, not to mention simply foolhardy. However, while it's
an unfortunate outcome, we take it in stride. The adverse side of the
whims of the goddess of variance can be expected to show it's face.
It's hardly an inevitable result, and in similar circumstances we have
retained the lion's share of the win; in others, we've enjoyed a
second hit that resulted in a handsome finish.

It's by no means essential that we see a trip through towards the full
initial anticipated play, "come hell or high water". However, it's
consistent with achieving corollary comp objectives that aren't our
primary play objective but are integral to what lends our play efforts
the greatest satisfaction.

This said, I have no illusion that breaking our trip after a
significant win would in some manner improve our overall play results.
It's not a matter of hand waving to grasp the idea that when it comes
to our overall play "it's all one long session". Our results entirely
bear this out -- allowing for variance that's inherent in any game of
chance.

There's a persistent suggestion in your writing that you've largely
eliminated the element of variance from your play. While you give
reasonable credit to the role of luck in your results, one can't fail
to come away from your articles without a sense that there's an
inevitable winning outcome in short order when adopting your play
approach -- a characteristic that you paint as entirely at odds with
the prospect faced by an advantage player.

-------

While it should be of little consequence to you, it's this latter
aspect of your writing that causes me to marginalize it and not
actively recommend it to others. Speaking for myself, as interesting
and intriguing as I find your columns, it's become apparent that
others aren't likely to come away with a "reading between the lines"
that has contributed to the value I've found in your work.

I'll climb off my high horse, Rob ... just venting some pent up
observations (something for which this group is uniquely suited :wink:

- Harry