Little dicky----Here's a guy with more of a problem than even you! And
just LIKE you, he's dragged his poor wife into the menagerie to share
the pain.
Shirley and I both play at Chairman
level at both Fiesta and Station, which adds up to $1 million coin-in
per month between us, including both properties. I believe both are
decent plays.
Bob Dancer
Little dicky----Here's a guy with more of a problem than even you!
And
just LIKE you, he's dragged his poor wife into the menagerie to share
the pain.
We've all seen you display this jealousy time and again. I can see why
you'd call it a disease. You can't stand to see someone else succeed
where you failed. You can't accept that Bob (and others) are able to
treat VP as a vocation. They can put in the hours necessary to make a
good living and, unlike you, avoid the potential pitfalls while doing
it. It's no different than a good paying job where they have complete
independence. You'd be much happier if you could just accept this and
move on with your life.
Expect Robbies' normal babbling as a response.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...> wrote:
Shirley and I both play at Chairman
level at both Fiesta and Station, which adds up to $1 million coin-in
per month between us, including both properties. I believe both are
decent plays.Bob Dancer
why you'd call it a disease. You can't stand to see someone else
succeed where you failed. You can't accept that Bob (and others) are
able to treat VP as a vocation. They can put in the hours necessary to
make a good living and, unlike you, avoid the potential pitfalls while
doing it. It's no different than a good paying job where they have
complete independence. You'd be much happier if you could just accept
this and move on with your life.
Expect Robbies' normal babbling as a response.
Oooohh....You've seemed to have awoken on the wrong side of the bed
today!! BINGO!!
Now onto making you look like the idiot that you truly are....again.
1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in anything other
than his video poker business ventures. (you know those 3 jobs he has?--
he's good at all of them). Heck, you can't even provide proof that
YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about it all the
time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability charts mean nothing
when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up for someone you
chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?
2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when someone can say
they run a million bucks through casino vp machines each month.
Yessiree! I wonder....do you also play video poker too often and too
much?
3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should be ashamed
of yourself. I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
or ever will, and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each month - pensions
and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable stuff without the
ned to degenerate into being a daily unhealthy casino visitor.
4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting on how/why he's
gotten his wife into the same rut he's in. Hmmm....Feeling a bit guilty
now, are we? I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime Channel & Lifetime
Movie Network.
5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person when I've
publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his knowledge,
perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to do. But I also
opined on how much he is addicted to the machines, and his is a
lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family than I'd want
to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of his book even
after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of times where he
makes things up in some of his articles.
I think you're making up your support for him this time, and you can
really see how out-of-control his writing makes him appear. But it
takes one to support one.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
We've all seen you display this jealousy time and again. I can see
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> We've all seen you display this jealousy time and again. I can
see
why you'd call it a disease. You can't stand to see someone else
succeed where you failed. You can't accept that Bob (and others)
are
able to treat VP as a vocation. They can put in the hours necessary
to
make a good living and, unlike you, avoid the potential pitfalls
while
doing it. It's no different than a good paying job where they have
complete independence. You'd be much happier if you could just
accept
this and move on with your life.
Expect Robbies' normal babbling as a response.Oooohh....You've seemed to have awoken on the wrong side of the bed
today!! BINGO!!
Just the facts, as usual.
Now onto making you look like the idiot that you truly are....again.
Don't hold your breath.
1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in anything
other
than his video poker business ventures. (you know those 3 jobs he
has?--
he's good at all of them).
That is exactly what I was talking about. Bob has the reputation you
long for over and over again. Did I mention jealousy?
Heck, you can't even provide proof that
YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about it all the
time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability charts mean
nothing
when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up for someone you
chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?
Just the facts. I chastised Bob for being arrogant. Period. I prove
you are a LAF. Period.
2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when someone can
say
they run a million bucks through casino vp machines each month.
That's how it's done. How many hours do you think Bob puts into VP
each week compared to a typical job? Just what is the real
difference? It's really not unlike good stock investors. There are
risks but if you know what you're doing you can profit.
Yessiree! I wonder....do you also play video poker too often and
too
much?
Just right.
3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should be
ashamed
of yourself.
Just the facts, as usual. Your jealousy is showing again.
I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
or ever will,
Hmmm. I asked you to back this up before and you couldn't do it. You
are a LAF.
and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each month -
pensions
and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable stuff without
the
ned to degenerate into being a daily unhealthy casino visitor.
More babble. We've heard it all before and you haven't proved a thing.
4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting on how/why
he's
gotten his wife into the same rut he's in. Hmmm....Feeling a bit
guilty
now, are we?
Since most of us don't consider it a rut, what's the problem? They
probably live the life they want.
I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime Channel &
Lifetime
Movie Network.
Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew exactly how
you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat out lies.
5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person when I've
publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his knowledge,
perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to do. But I
also
opined on how much he is addicted to the machines, and his is a
lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family than I'd
want
to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of his book even
after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of times where he
makes things up in some of his articles.I think you're making up your support for him this time, and you
can
really see how out-of-control his writing makes him appear. But it
takes one to support one.
More babble. The issue is not about his writings. Leave it to Robbie
to lose his train of thought. As I said previously, you are all about
jealousy with no regard to facts. You provided nothing here to make
anyone think differently.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@> wrote:
> > We've all seen you display this jealousy time and again. I can
see why you'd call it a disease. You can't stand to see someone
else succeed where you failed. You can't accept that Bob (and others)
are able to treat VP as a vocation. They can put in the hours
necessary to make a good living and, unlike you, avoid the potential
pitfalls while doing it. It's no different than a good paying job
where they have complete independence. You'd be much happier if you
could just accept this and move on with your life.
> Expect Robbies' normal babbling as a response.
> Oooohh....You've seemed to have awoken on the wrong side of the
bed today!! BINGO!!
Just the facts, as usual.
Gee little dicky. Looks like a manufactured story for feel-good
reasons to me. And that's a fact you can take to the bank!
> Now onto making you look like the idiot that you truly
are....again.
Don't hold your breath.
You already beat it to the punch by your first answer.
> 1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in anything
other than his video poker business ventures. (you know those 3
jobs he has?--he's good at all of them).
That is exactly what I was talking about. Bob has the reputation
you long for over and over again. Did I mention jealousy?
Jealousy? Clearly, he isn't hardly the success I have been over the
past 9 years in pure profiting. Guess that's not it! Would I want to
be engulfed in his businesses? HA! I have more in my 401k from
working REAL jobs than any job in the outside gaming business would
ever pay over 20 years! Guess that's not it either. Too bad you
couldn't come up with one more idiotic statement. Then I'd let you
strike out swinging - like a man.
> Heck, you can't even provide proof that
> YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about it all
the time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability charts mean
nothing when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up for
someone you chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?
Just the facts. I chastised Bob for being arrogant. Period. I prove
you are a LAF. Period.
From what I saw you looked pretty stupid then which is just as you
look now. Period.
> 2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when someone
can say they run a million bucks through casino vp machines each
month.
That's how it's done. How many hours do you think Bob puts into VP
each week compared to a typical job? Just what is the real
difference? It's really not unlike good stock investors. There are
risks but if you know what you're doing you can profit.
Being that he works for real - which is what puts the gaming money
into his pockets - he's gotta have a life worse than yours. While you
may spend 80% of the time playing, analyzing, posting, and worrying
about video poker, he's doing it even when he sleeps. That's why it's
called a sickness. BTW--Ever see a positive EV $25 machine at Fiesta
or Stations? Now you know why I continuously expose how these people
will even add in a sunny day and a smile from their host as they
create a 'good play'.
> Yessiree! I wonder....do you also play video poker too often and
too much?
Just right.
You're not doing too well here.
> 3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should be
ashamed of yourself.Just the facts, as usual. Your jealousy is showing again.
you got the facts on that 'good paying job' assertions? Or are you
prepared to claim that since someone else 'asserted' it and you don't
want proof, it's fine for you to assert it with the same negligence?
I'm WAITING!!!!
> I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
> or ever will,Hmmm. I asked you to back this up before and you couldn't do it.
You are a LAF.
Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you ready to ante up
the $640k THIS time? That'll prove my side--which is the only side
you're talking about. You'll never get him to come in on it because
he didn't before. I like this: You chicken out, he chickens out, so
in a futile attempt to save face, you make believe it never happened.
Better read my article on you again!
> and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
> aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each month -
pensions and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable stuff
without the need to degenerate into being a daily unhealthy casino
visitor.
More babble. We've heard it all before and you haven't proved a
thing.
So you don't get a pension? I'm glad I turned down 2 offers from IBM!
> 4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting on
how/why he's gotten his wife into the same rut he's in.
Hmmm....Feeling a bit guilty now, are we?
Since most of us don't consider it a rut, what's the problem? They
probably live the life they want.
I'd come back and try to soften the blow with that baloney too.
> I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
> good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime Channel &
Lifetime Movie Network.
Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew exactly how
you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat out lies.
Does that make sense? Are you responding to what?? These channels are
almost exclusively devoted to man-hating movies, and that's because
the men almost always mistreat the women--sometimes beyond belief (as
we see here). Get it now?
> 5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person when I've
> publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his knowledge,
> perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to do. But I
also opined on how much he is addicted to the machines, and his is
a lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family than I'd
want to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of his book
even after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of times where
he makes things up in some of his articles.
> I think you're making up your support for him this time.
If you'd like to read any of the articles where I support exactly
what I said, tell me. Again, thinking is not in the best interest of
a nerd.
and you can really see how out-of-control his writing makes him
appear. But it takes one to support one.
So now you agree he's spinning out of control. I was wondering just
how long it would take you. As far as me, the reason I recognize it
so easily is because I've been there.
More babble. The issue is not about his writings. Leave it to
Robbie to lose his train of thought.
Yo--It's about HIM, and his writings are part of whom?? Are you
trying to take credit for that in yet ANOTHER attempt to desparately
show that you BELONG to whatever he belongs to? Nice try.
As I said previously, you are all about jealousy with no regard to
facts. You provided nothing here to make anyone think differently.
QED.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
> --- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> > > We've all seen you display this jealousy time and again. I
can
> see why you'd call it a disease. You can't stand to see someone
else succeed where you failed. You can't accept that Bob (and
others)
> are able to treat VP as a vocation. They can put in the hours
necessary to make a good living and, unlike you, avoid the
potential
pitfalls while doing it. It's no different than a good paying job
where they have complete independence. You'd be much happier if you
could just accept this and move on with your life.
> > Expect Robbies' normal babbling as a response.> > Oooohh....You've seemed to have awoken on the wrong side of the
bed today!! BINGO!!> Just the facts, as usual.
Gee little dicky. Looks like a manufactured story for feel-good
reasons to me. And that's a fact you can take to the bank!
Do you ever stop babbling?
> > Now onto making you look like the idiot that you truly
are....again.> Don't hold your breath.
You already beat it to the punch by your first answer.
Keep holding it ...
> > 1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in
anything
> other than his video poker business ventures. (you know those 3
jobs he has?--he's good at all of them).
>
> That is exactly what I was talking about. Bob has the reputation
you long for over and over again. Did I mention jealousy?Jealousy? Clearly, he isn't hardly the success I have been over the
past 9 years in pure profiting.
The only thing that is clear is that you won't bet him. I think this
speaks volumes.
Guess that's not it! Would I want to
be engulfed in his businesses? HA!
Probably not, you want people to call you a guru which just isn't
going to happen.
I have more in my 401k from
working REAL jobs than any job in the outside gaming business would
ever pay over 20 years! Guess that's not it either. Too bad you
couldn't come up with one more idiotic statement. Then I'd let you
strike out swinging - like a man.
Your jealousy is so obvious.
> > Heck, you can't even provide proof that
> > YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about it all
the time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability charts mean
> nothing when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up for
someone you chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?> Just the facts. I chastised Bob for being arrogant. Period. I
prove
> you are a LAF. Period.
From what I saw you looked pretty stupid then which is just as you
look now. Period.
Just the facts, as usual. Your typical monkey boy responses only
reinforce to everyone that I'm right on target.
> > 2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when someone
can say they run a million bucks through casino vp machines each
month.> That's how it's done. How many hours do you think Bob puts into
VP
> each week compared to a typical job? Just what is the real
> difference? It's really not unlike good stock investors. There
are
> risks but if you know what you're doing you can profit.
Being that he works for real - which is what puts the gaming money
into his pockets - he's gotta have a life worse than yours.
Another worthless assertion. These factless comments only serve to
make you look impotent.
While you
may spend 80% of the time playing, analyzing, posting, and worrying
about video poker, he's doing it even when he sleeps.
Another impotent response.
That's why it's
called a sickness. BTW--Ever see a positive EV $25 machine at
Fiesta
or Stations?
I don't look for them, but the machine payback is not the only thing
a good player adds into the EV.
Now you know why I continuously expose how these people
will even add in a sunny day and a smile from their host as they
create a 'good play'.
Now I see why you make these idiotic comments. You clearly aren't
smart enough to figure out all the parameters of a good play. I can
more easily see how you failed as an APer.
> > Yessiree! I wonder....do you also play video poker too often
and
> too much?
> Just right.
You're not doing too well here.
Just the facts, as usual. You should try it sometime.
> > 3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should be
> ashamed of yourself.
>
> Just the facts, as usual. Your jealousy is showing again.you got the facts on that 'good paying job' assertions? Or are you
prepared to claim that since someone else 'asserted' it and you
don't
want proof, it's fine for you to assert it with the same
negligence?
I'm WAITING!!!!
More babbling. I said exactly what I meant. If someone can put 10
million dollars through each year with a 1.5% edge they will average
$150K/year. I call that a good paying job. I don't know if Bob does
this or not, but it is doable. That is what I said and simple
mathematics support this as a FACT.
PS. You don't need to wait any longer.
> > I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
> > or ever will,
>
> Hmmm. I asked you to back this up before and you couldn't do it.
You are a LAF.Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you ready to ante up
the $640k THIS time?
LMAO. YOU are the one that claims Bob doesn't make this much, so you
can either back it up by offering him a bet, or continue to make
yourself look foolish. Your choice, I win either way.
That'll prove my side--which is the only side
you're talking about.
Lie, you knew EXACTLY what I was talking about
Better read my article on you again!
Yawn. Could you send me some copies for wrapping up the trash.
> > and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
> > aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each month -
> pensions and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable
stuff
without the need to degenerate into being a daily unhealthy casino
visitor.> More babble. We've heard it all before and you haven't proved a
thing.So you don't get a pension?
So you want to change the subject?
I'm glad I turned down 2 offers from IBM!
So is IBM.
> > 4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting on
how/why he's gotten his wife into the same rut he's in.
Hmmm....Feeling a bit guilty now, are we?> Since most of us don't consider it a rut, what's the problem?
They
> probably live the life they want.
I'd come back and try to soften the blow with that baloney too.
It's nice how common sense refutes most of your illogic.
> > I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
> > good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime Channel &
> Lifetime Movie Network.> Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew exactly
how
> you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat out lies.
Does that make sense? Are you responding to what??
The "whole thing". Can you ever keep up?
These channels are
almost exclusively devoted to man-hating movies, and that's because
the men almost always mistreat the women--sometimes beyond belief
(as
we see here). Get it now?
I ignored that part of your babbling.
> > 5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person when I've
> > publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his
knowledge,
> > perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to do. But I
> also opined on how much he is addicted to the machines, and his
is
a lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family than I'd
> want to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of his
book
even after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of times
where
he makes things up in some of his articles.
> > I think you're making up your support for him this time.
If you'd like to read any of the articles where I support exactly
what I said, tell me. Again, thinking is not in the best interest
of
a nerd.
LMAO. Go back to msg 3741 and you will notice that these are NOT my
words, they are actually YOUR words. (Great big belly laugh) You just
called yourself a nerd.
>and you can really see how out-of-control his writing makes him
>appear. But it takes one to support one.So now you agree he's spinning out of control. I was wondering just
how long it would take you. As far as me, the reason I recognize it
so easily is because I've been there.
And, still doing it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Robbie can't even
remember that these were his own words from this morning. I think
this is pretty good evidence of Robbies real goals ... the CON.
> More babble. The issue is not about his writings. Leave it to
Robbie to lose his train of thought.Yo--It's about HIM, and his writings are part of whom?? Are you
trying to take credit for that in yet ANOTHER attempt to
desparately
show that you BELONG to whatever he belongs to? Nice try.
ROTFLMAO. Whew. I don't think I can take another example of Robbies'
dedication to looking stupid.
>As I said previously, you are all about jealousy with no regard to
>facts. You provided nothing here to make anyone think differently.QED.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Now, go ahead and take that
breath ...
1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in
anything other than his video poker business ventures. (you know
those 3 jobs he has?--he's good at all of them).
> That is exactly what I was talking about. Bob has the reputation
> you long for over and over again. Did I mention jealousy?
> Jealousy? Clearly, he isn't hardly the success I have been over
the past 9 years in pure profiting.
The only thing that is clear is that you won't bet him. I think
this speaks volumes.
No I won't any longer, and you've read why. What speaks volumes is
when I tried.
> Guess that's not it! Would I want to be engulfed in his
businesses? HA!
Probably not, you want people to call you a guru which just isn't
going to happen.
CALL me a guru? Where'd you get that? I'm known as the most
intelligent professional in the game. That's all I care about. 'Guru'
is a state of mind.
> I have more in my 401k from
> working REAL jobs than any job in the outside gaming business
would ever pay over 20 years! Guess that's not it either. Too bad you
> couldn't come up with one more idiotic statement. Then I'd let
you strike out swinging - like a man.
Your jealousy is so obvious.
And the fact that you have no answers here allows you to manufacture
something in its place.
> > > Heck, you can't even provide proof that
> > > YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about it
all the time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability charts mean
> > nothing when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up for
> someone you chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?
>
> > Just the facts. I chastised Bob for being arrogant. Period. I
prove you are a LAF. Period.
>
> From what I saw you looked pretty stupid then which is just as
you look now. Period.
Just the facts, as usual. Your typical monkey boy responses only
reinforce to everyone that I'm right on target.
Let's see.....He's arrogant, I'm a liar. But a bafoon like Dan Paymar
is OK! Now tell me.....whom do you idolize the most out of that group?
> > > 2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when
someone can say they run a million bucks through casino vp machines
each month.
> > That's how it's done. How many hours do you think Bob puts into
VP each week compared to a typical job? Just what is the real
> > difference? It's really not unlike good stock investors. There
are risks but if you know what you're doing you can profit.
>
> Being that he works for real - which is what puts the gaming
money into his pockets - he's gotta have a life worse than yours.
Another worthless assertion. These factless comments only serve to
make you look impotent.
So you prefer to turn your head the other way when the bus comes
by....big surprise.
> While you may spend 80% of the time playing, analyzing, posting,
and worrying about video poker, he's doing it even when he sleeps.
Another impotent response.
But true!
> That's why it's called a sickness. BTW--Ever see a positive EV
$25 machine at Fiesta or Stations?
I don't look for them, but the machine payback is not the only
thing a good player adds into the EV.
OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only disturbed ones
possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict requires to
justifiably feed his or her habit.
> Now you know why I continuously expose how these people
> will even add in a sunny day and a smile from their host as they
> create a 'good play'.
Now I see why you make these idiotic comments. You clearly aren't
smart enough to figure out all the parameters of a good play. I can
more easily see how you failed as an APer.
Oops! I forgot to add in the tournament money that you can count
anyway even if you win nothing, the drawing values even when your
name isn't drawn....and that oh-so-special face-to-face with The
Queen! That's gotta be worth the trip! Talk about phantom bucks.....
> 3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should be
> ashamed of yourself.
> > Just the facts, as usual. Your jealousy is showing again.
> you got the facts on that 'good paying job' assertions? Or are
you prepared to claim that since someone else 'asserted' it and you
don't want proof, it's fine for you to assert it with the same
negligence? I'm WAITING!!!!More babbling. I said exactly what I meant. If someone can put 10
million dollars through each year with a 1.5% edge they will
average $150K/year. I call that a good paying job. I don't know if
Bob does this or not, but it is doable. That is what I said and
simple mathematics support this as a FACT.
Oh, then you're WAAAY off. That's just his thru-put at Stations!
Didn't you know, he makes MILLIONS from all the other casinos too!
Right under their noses. And he writes about it and rubs it in all
the time! Right in front of their noses.
> I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
> or ever will,
> Hmmm. I asked you to back this up before and you couldn't do it.
> You are a LAF.
> Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you ready to ante
up the $640k THIS time?
LMAO. YOU are the one that claims Bob doesn't make this much, so
you can either back it up by offering him a bet, or continue to make
yourself look foolish. Your choice, I win either way.
> That'll prove my side--which is the only side
> you're talking about.Lie, you knew EXACTLY what I was talking about
> Better read my article on you again!
Yawn. Could you send me some copies for wrapping up the trash.
I'll leave all that in there for you to contemplate for awhile longer.
> > > and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
> > > aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each month -
pensions and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable
stuff without the need to degenerate into being a daily unhealthy
casino visitor.
> > More babble. We've heard it all before and you haven't proved a
> thing.
It speaks for itself. This one you'll like: "The Proof Is In The
Pudding!"
> So you don't get a pension?
So you want to change the subject?
> I'm glad I turned down 2 offers from IBM!
So is IBM.
But I sucked them for the trips--one from Europe to Colorado & back.
That cut into your pension.
> > > 4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting on
> how/why he's gotten his wife into the same rut he's in.
> Hmmm....Feeling a bit guilty now, are we?
>
> > Since most of us don't consider it a rut, what's the problem?
They probably live the life they want.
> I'd come back and try to soften the blow with that baloney too.
It's nice how common sense refutes most of your illogic.
Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking questions, and one of
them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be dragging
unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you when you
choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"
> > > I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
> > > good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime Channel &
> > Lifetime Movie Network.
>
> > Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew exactly
how you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat out lies.
>
> Does that make sense? Are you responding to what??The "whole thing". Can you ever keep up?
> These channels are
> almost exclusively devoted to man-hating movies, and that's
because the men almost always mistreat the women--sometimes beyond
belief (as we see here). Get it now?
I ignored that part of your babbling.
Certainly you did. That's like putting up the shields of protectiuon!
> > > 5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person when
I've
> > > publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his
knowledge,
> > > perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to do. But
I
> > also opined on how much he is addicted to the machines, and his
is
> a lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family than
I'd
> > want to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of his
book
> even after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of times
where
> he makes things up in some of his articles.
>
> > > I think you're making up your support for him this time.
>
> If you'd like to read any of the articles where I support exactly
> what I said, tell me. Again, thinking is not in the best interest
of a nerd.LMAO. Go back to msg 3741 and you will notice that these are NOT my
words, they are actually YOUR words. (Great big belly laugh) You
just called yourself a nerd.
Huh? Read the articles and you won't be so confusing.
> >and you can really see how out-of-control his writing makes him
> >appear. But it takes one to support one.
>
> So now you agree he's spinning out of control. I was wondering
just how long it would take you. As far as me, the reason I recognize
it so easily is because I've been there.
And, still doing it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Robbie can't even
remember that these were his own words from this morning. I think
this is pretty good evidence of Robbies real goals ... the CON.
Are you still in the same post as me here--following you is like
listen to a German speak Italian.
> > More babble. The issue is not about his writings. Leave it to
> Robbie to lose his train of thought.
>
> Yo--It's about HIM, and his writings are part of whom?? Are you
> trying to take credit for that in yet ANOTHER attempt to
desparately show that you BELONG to whatever he belongs to? Nice
try.
ROTFLMAO. Whew. I don't think I can take another example of
Robbies' dedication to looking stupid.
whenever I bring up how you're trying to be part of some video poker
club of some sort, you hurt. I understand. And I LOVE IT!!
> >As I said previously, you are all about jealousy with no regard
to facts. You provided nothing here to make anyone think differently.
>
> QED.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Now, go ahead and take that
breath ...
But wait---MY QED stands for "Quickly Eroding Dicky"!
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> 1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in
> anything other than his video poker business ventures. (you know
those 3 jobs he has?--he's good at all of them).> That is exactly what I was talking about. Bob has the reputation
> > you long for over and over again. Did I mention jealousy?> > Jealousy? Clearly, he isn't hardly the success I have been over
the past 9 years in pure profiting.> The only thing that is clear is that you won't bet him. I think
this speaks volumes.No I won't any longer, and you've read why. What speaks volumes is
when I tried.
So, you're saying you JUST challenged him that he didn't really
profit from his own VP play, is that right?
> > Guess that's not it! Would I want to be engulfed in his
businesses? HA!> Probably not, you want people to call you a guru which just isn't
> going to happen.CALL me a guru? Where'd you get that? I'm known as the most
intelligent professional in the game. That's all I care
about. 'Guru'
is a state of mind.
QED.
> > I have more in my 401k from
> > working REAL jobs than any job in the outside gaming business
would ever pay over 20 years! Guess that's not it either. Too bad
you
> > couldn't come up with one more idiotic statement. Then I'd let
you strike out swinging - like a man.> Your jealousy is so obvious.
And the fact that you have no answers here allows you to
manufacture
something in its place.
I've already provided the answers, you are providing the proof. Your
jealousy is extremely evident in all your posts.
> > > > Heck, you can't even provide proof that
> > > > YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about it
all the time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability charts
mean
> > > nothing when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up for
> > someone you chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?
> >
> > > Just the facts. I chastised Bob for being arrogant. Period. I
> prove you are a LAF. Period.
> >
> > From what I saw you looked pretty stupid then which is just as
you look now. Period.
>
> Just the facts, as usual. Your typical monkey boy responses only
> reinforce to everyone that I'm right on target.Let's see.....He's arrogant, I'm a liar. But a bafoon like Dan
Paymar
is OK! Now tell me.....whom do you idolize the most out of that
group?
I don't idolize anyone. Be honest, stick to the facts and don't talk
down to anyone. Do that and you'll have no problems with me.
> > > > 2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when
someone can say they run a million bucks through casino vp machines
each month.
> > > That's how it's done. How many hours do you think Bob puts
into
> VP each week compared to a typical job? Just what is the real
> > > difference? It's really not unlike good stock investors.
There
> are risks but if you know what you're doing you can profit.
> >
> > Being that he works for real - which is what puts the gaming
money into his pockets - he's gotta have a life worse than yours.> Another worthless assertion. These factless comments only serve
to
> make you look impotent.
So you prefer to turn your head the other way when the bus comes
by....big surprise.
Just the facts, as usual.
> > While you may spend 80% of the time playing, analyzing,
posting,
and worrying about video poker, he's doing it even when he sleeps.
>
> Another impotent response.But true!
No, you provided no evidence so it's just another worthless
assertion. That's what makes you impotent.
> > That's why it's called a sickness. BTW--Ever see a positive EV
$25 machine at Fiesta or Stations?
>
> I don't look for them, but the machine payback is not the only
thing a good player adds into the EV.OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only disturbed ones
possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict requires to
justifiably feed his or her habit.
Impotent response again.
> > Now you know why I continuously expose how these people
> > will even add in a sunny day and a smile from their host as
they
> > create a 'good play'.
> Now I see why you make these idiotic comments. You clearly aren't
> smart enough to figure out all the parameters of a good play. I
can
> more easily see how you failed as an APer.
Oops! I forgot to add in the tournament money that you can count
anyway even if you win nothing, the drawing values even when your
name isn't drawn....and that oh-so-special face-to-face with The
Queen! That's gotta be worth the trip! Talk about phantom bucks.....
Since I play a lower denom I can find good plays without adding in
extra value. However, we won over $3000 last year in promotions which
did help the bottem line. So, it does happen and it makes sense to
factor in these other sources of CASH. Its' simple math again, you
should try a remedial course some day.
> 3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should be
> ashamed of yourself.> > > Just the facts, as usual. Your jealousy is showing again.
> > you got the facts on that 'good paying job' assertions? Or are
you prepared to claim that since someone else 'asserted' it and you
> don't want proof, it's fine for you to assert it with the same
> negligence? I'm WAITING!!!!
>
> More babbling. I said exactly what I meant. If someone can put 10
> million dollars through each year with a 1.5% edge they will
average $150K/year. I call that a good paying job. I don't know if
Bob does this or not, but it is doable. That is what I said and
simple mathematics support this as a FACT.Oh, then you're WAAAY off. That's just his thru-put at Stations!
Didn't you know, he makes MILLIONS from all the other casinos too!
Right under their noses. And he writes about it and rubs it in all
the time! Right in front of their noses.
I don't remember him claiming "millions". Give us a reference.
> I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
> or ever will,> Hmmm. I asked you to back this up before and you couldn't do it.
> > You are a LAF.> > Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you ready to
ante
up the $640k THIS time?
I thought you said you weren't betting anymore. Was that another lie?
But, you know exactly what I'm talking about. You have claimed Bob
loses every year. You haven't even tried to back that up. QED.
>
> LMAO. YOU are the one that claims Bob doesn't make this much, so
you can either back it up by offering him a bet, or continue to
make
> yourself look foolish. Your choice, I win either way.
Robbie conveniently skips over this one.
> > That'll prove my side--which is the only side
> > you're talking about.
>
> Lie, you knew EXACTLY what I was talking about
>
> > Better read my article on you again!
>
> Yawn. Could you send me some copies for wrapping up the trash.I'll leave all that in there for you to contemplate for awhile
longer.
Is this long enough? Another impotent response from little Robbie.
> > > > and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
> > > > aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each
month -
pensions and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable
> stuff without the need to degenerate into being a daily unhealthy
casino visitor.> > > More babble. We've heard it all before and you haven't proved
a
> > thing.
It speaks for itself. This one you'll like: "The Proof Is In The
Pudding!"
Then provide us with some of that "pudding".
> > So you don't get a pension?
> So you want to change the subject?
> > I'm glad I turned down 2 offers from IBM!
> So is IBM.
But I sucked them for the trips--one from Europe to Colorado &
back.
That cut into your pension.
A gnat on a camels back. I'll accept the millionth of a mill
reduction just to know you didn't make the grade.
> > > > 4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting on
> > how/why he's gotten his wife into the same rut he's in.
> > Hmmm....Feeling a bit guilty now, are we?
> >
> > > Since most of us don't consider it a rut, what's the problem?
> They probably live the life they want.> > I'd come back and try to soften the blow with that baloney too.
> It's nice how common sense refutes most of your illogic.
Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking questions, and one of
them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be dragging
unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you when you
choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"
A better question would be "Why are you wasting your time attending a
class that considers proven math to be wrong?"
> > > > I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
> > > > good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime Channel
&
> > > Lifetime Movie Network.
> >
> > > Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew
exactly
> how you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat out
lies.
> >
> > Does that make sense? Are you responding to what??
>
> The "whole thing". Can you ever keep up?
>
> > These channels are
> > almost exclusively devoted to man-hating movies, and that's
because the men almost always mistreat the women--sometimes beyond
belief (as we see here). Get it now?
>
> I ignored that part of your babbling.Certainly you did. That's like putting up the shields of
protectiuon!
I don't watch those channels so I ignored your references. I choose
to comment only on topics I know about. Unlike little Robbie ...
> > > > 5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person when
I've
> > > > publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his
> knowledge,
> > > > perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to do.
But
I
> > > also opined on how much he is addicted to the machines, and
his
> is
> > a lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family than
I'd
> > > want to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of his
> book
> > even after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of times
> where
> > he makes things up in some of his articles.
> >
> > > > I think you're making up your support for him this time.
> >
> > If you'd like to read any of the articles where I support
exactly
> > what I said, tell me. Again, thinking is not in the best
interest
> of a nerd.
>
> LMAO. Go back to msg 3741 and you will notice that these are NOT
my
> words, they are actually YOUR words. (Great big belly laugh) You
just called yourself a nerd.Huh? Read the articles and you won't be so confusing.
I think "huh" speaks for itself.
> > >and you can really see how out-of-control his writing makes
him
> > >appear. But it takes one to support one.
> >
> > So now you agree he's spinning out of control. I was wondering
just how long it would take you. As far as me, the reason I
recognize
it so easily is because I've been there.
>
> And, still doing it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Robbie can't
even
> remember that these were his own words from this morning. I think
> this is pretty good evidence of Robbies real goals ... the CON.Are you still in the same post as me here--following you is like
listen to a German speak Italian.
ROTFLMAO. It just doesn't get any better than this.
> > > More babble. The issue is not about his writings. Leave it to
> > Robbie to lose his train of thought.
> >
> > Yo--It's about HIM, and his writings are part of whom?? Are you
> > trying to take credit for that in yet ANOTHER attempt to
> desparately show that you BELONG to whatever he belongs to? Nice
try.
>
> ROTFLMAO. Whew. I don't think I can take another example of
Robbies' dedication to looking stupid.whenever I bring up how you're trying to be part of some video
poker
club of some sort, you hurt. I understand. And I LOVE IT!!
Sorry, but it's a little late to try and save face. "I LOVE IT".
> > >As I said previously, you are all about jealousy with no
regard
to facts. You provided nothing here to make anyone think
differently.
> >
> > QED.> I couldn't have said it better myself. Now, go ahead and take
that
> breath ...
But wait---MY QED stands for "Quickly Eroding Dicky"!
Not surprising to see you put your OWN definition on commonly
accepted phrases and acronyms. You try and do the same thing to
simple math, undisputable facts, and just about anything you think
will further your con.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > 1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in
> > anything other than his video poker business ventures. (you
know
> those 3 jobs he has?--he's good at all of them).
>
> > That is exactly what I was talking about. Bob has the
reputation
> > > you long for over and over again. Did I mention jealousy?
>
> > > Jealousy? Clearly, he isn't hardly the success I have been
over
> the past 9 years in pure profiting.
>
> > The only thing that is clear is that you won't bet him. I think
> this speaks volumes.
>
> No I won't any longer, and you've read why. What speaks volumes
is
> when I tried.
So, you're saying you JUST challenged him that he didn't really
profit from his own VP play, is that right?
It was in the article to any guru like him or math geek like you, and
it went both ways. We both provide proof.
>
> > > Guess that's not it! Would I want to be engulfed in his
> businesses? HA!
>
> > Probably not, you want people to call you a guru which just
isn't
> > going to happen.
>
> CALL me a guru? Where'd you get that? I'm known as the most
> intelligent professional in the game. That's all I care
about. 'Guru'
> is a state of mind.QED.
DEQ'd again.
> > > I have more in my 401k from
> > > working REAL jobs than any job in the outside gaming business
> would ever pay over 20 years! Guess that's not it either. Too bad
you
> > > couldn't come up with one more idiotic statement. Then I'd
let
> you strike out swinging - like a man.
>
> > Your jealousy is so obvious.
>
> And the fact that you have no answers here allows you to
manufacture something in its place.I've already provided the answers, you are providing the proof.
Your jealousy is extremely evident in all your posts.
Answer: You're jealous. You're simply repeating what I remind you of
every day about me. Next.
>
> > > > > Heck, you can't even provide proof that
> > > > > YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about
it
> all the time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability charts
mean
> > > > nothing when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up
for
> > > someone you chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?
> > >
> > > > Just the facts. I chastised Bob for being arrogant. Period.
I
> > prove you are a LAF. Period.
> > >
> > > From what I saw you looked pretty stupid then which is just
as
> you look now. Period.
> >
> > Just the facts, as usual. Your typical monkey boy responses
only
> > reinforce to everyone that I'm right on target.
>
> Let's see.....He's arrogant, I'm a liar. But a bafoon like Dan
Paymar
> is OK! Now tell me.....whom do you idolize the most out of that
group?I don't idolize anyone. Be honest, stick to the facts and don't
talk down to anyone. Do that and you'll have no problems with me.
HAHAHA--I INVITE problems with you because it's like toying with an
injured frog.
>
> > > > > 2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when
> someone can say they run a million bucks through casino vp
machines each month.
>
> > > > That's how it's done. How many hours do you think Bob puts
into
> > VP each week compared to a typical job? Just what is the real
> > > > difference? It's really not unlike good stock investors.
There
> > are risks but if you know what you're doing you can profit.
> > >
> > > Being that he works for real - which is what puts the gaming
> money into his pockets - he's gotta have a life worse than yours.
>
> > Another worthless assertion. These factless comments only serve
to
> > make you look impotent.
>
> So you prefer to turn your head the other way when the bus comes
> by....big surprise.Just the facts, as usual.
Show me one and I'll dance the jig.
>
> > > While you may spend 80% of the time playing, analyzing,
posting, and worrying about video poker, he's doing it even when he
sleeps.
> >
> > Another impotent response.
>
> But true!No, you provided no evidence so it's just another worthless
assertion. That's what makes you impotent.
Explain how evidence would enter this! My word is gospel here, and
when I say it, it's truth.
>
> > > That's why it's called a sickness. BTW--Ever see a positive
EV $25 machine at Fiesta or Stations?
> >
> > I don't look for them, but the machine payback is not the only
> thing a good player adds into the EV.
>
> OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only disturbed ones
> possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict requires to
> justifiably feed his or her habit.Impotent response again.
DEQ'd again.
>
> > > Now you know why I continuously expose how these people
> > > will even add in a sunny day and a smile from their host as
they create a 'good play'.
>
> > Now I see why you make these idiotic comments. You clearly
aren't
> > smart enough to figure out all the parameters of a good play. I
can
> > more easily see how you failed as an APer.
>
> Oops! I forgot to add in the tournament money that you can count
> anyway even if you win nothing, the drawing values even when your
> name isn't drawn....and that oh-so-special face-to-face with The
> Queen! That's gotta be worth the trip! Talk about phantom
bucks.....
Since I play a lower denom I can find good plays without adding in
extra value. However, we won over $3000 last year in promotions
which
did help the bottem line. So, it does happen and it makes sense to
factor in these other sources of CASH. Its' simple math again, you
should try a remedial course some day.
Of course--overvalue the promos--which no one can prove so you're
safe--and another magic moment just occured! A winning year!!! Right
out of Queen Jeans' script.
> > 3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should be
> > ashamed of yourself.
>
> > > > Just the facts, as usual. Your jealousy is showing again.
>
> > > you got the facts on that 'good paying job' assertions? Or
are
> you prepared to claim that since someone else 'asserted' it and
you
> > don't want proof, it's fine for you to assert it with the same
> > negligence? I'm WAITING!!!!
> >
> > More babbling. I said exactly what I meant. If someone can put
10
> > million dollars through each year with a 1.5% edge they will
> average $150K/year. I call that a good paying job. I don't know
if
> Bob does this or not, but it is doable. That is what I said and
> simple mathematics support this as a FACT.
>
> Oh, then you're WAAAY off. That's just his thru-put at Stations!
> Didn't you know, he makes MILLIONS from all the other casinos
too! Right under their noses. And he writes about it and rubs it in
all the time! Right in front of their noses.
I don't remember him claiming "millions". Give us a reference.
You ever read his casinogaming.com columns? My publisher also writes
there weekly, and I get messages all the time to look out for his
nonsense. That's where you'll be educated on what you
call 'assertions'.
>
> > I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
> > or ever will,
>
> > Hmmm. I asked you to back this up before and you couldn't do
it.
> > > You are a LAF.
>
> > > Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you ready to
ante up the $640k THIS time?I thought you said you weren't betting anymore. Was that another
lie?
I didn't say i was--you fell for that one too! The geek who couldn't
hold back his shot until all the facts were known.....
But, you know exactly what I'm talking about. You have claimed Bob
loses every year. You haven't even tried to back that up. QED.
I say he loses, he says he wins. He supports nothing when he can, and
I can't prove anything because I don't walk in his shoes. I've
checked on some of his claims and found them to be riddled with
nebulous wording and incomplete information that I later discoved on
my own. So it always comes down to simple common sense, and in this
case, simple common sense produces the clear winner.
> >
> > LMAO. YOU are the one that claims Bob doesn't make this much,
so
> you can either back it up by offering him a bet, or continue to
make
> > yourself look foolish. Your choice, I win either way.Robbie conveniently skips over this one.
It's all been said. Re-read for your own sanity.
>
> > > That'll prove my side--which is the only side
> > > you're talking about.
> >
> > Lie, you knew EXACTLY what I was talking about
> >
> > > Better read my article on you again!
> >
> > Yawn. Could you send me some copies for wrapping up the trash.
>
> I'll leave all that in there for you to contemplate for awhile
longer.Is this long enough? Another impotent response from little Robbie.
My guess is you just read the copy you printed out for the 16th time
because we all know how nerds like to punish themselves.
>
> > > > > and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
> > > > > aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each
month -
> pensions and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable
> > stuff without the need to degenerate into being a daily
unhealthy
> casino visitor.
>
> > > > More babble. We've heard it all before and you haven't
proved
a
> > > thing.
>
> It speaks for itself. This one you'll like: "The Proof Is In The
> Pudding!"Then provide us with some of that "pudding".
As soon as you do. Mine's chocolate, but unlike yours, it's fat free.
>
> > > So you don't get a pension?
>
> > So you want to change the subject?
>
> > > I'm glad I turned down 2 offers from IBM!
>
> > So is IBM.
>
> But I sucked them for the trips--one from Europe to Colorado &
back. That cut into your pension.A gnat on a camels back. I'll accept the millionth of a mill
reduction just to know you didn't make the grade.
Just to know I ate something you though you were going to get is the
topping on the cake for me!
>
> > > > > 4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting
on
> > > how/why he's gotten his wife into the same rut he's in.
> > > Hmmm....Feeling a bit guilty now, are we?
> > >
> > > > Since most of us don't consider it a rut, what's the
problem?
> > They probably live the life they want.
>
> > > I'd come back and try to soften the blow with that baloney
too.
>
> > It's nice how common sense refutes most of your illogic.
>
> Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking questions, and one
of
> them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be dragging
> unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you when you
> choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"A better question would be "Why are you wasting your time attending
a class that considers proven math to be wrong?"
Now don't be playing 'switch the question' here. You know how chicken
that makes you look!!
>
> > > > > I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
> > > > > good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime
Channel & Lifetime Movie Network.
> > >
> > > > Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew
exactly
> > how you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat out
lies.
> > >
> > > Does that make sense? Are you responding to what??
> >
> > The "whole thing". Can you ever keep up?
Huh??
> >
> > > These channels are
> > > almost exclusively devoted to man-hating movies, and that's
> because the men almost always mistreat the women--sometimes
beyond
> belief (as we see here). Get it now?
> >
> > I ignored that part of your babbling.
>
> Certainly you did. That's like putting up the shields of
protectiuon!I don't watch those channels so I ignored your references. I choose
to comment only on topics I know about. Unlike little Robbie ...
That's why you have so little experience in life--you're never
willing to learn anything. You simply live a life of theory and suck
it all up on the fly!
>
> > > > > 5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person
when
> I've
> > > > > publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his
> > knowledge,
> > > > > perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to do.
But
> I
> > > > also opined on how much he is addicted to the machines, and
his
> > is
> > > a lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family
than
> I'd
> > > > want to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of
his
> > book
> > > even after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of
times
> > where
> > > he makes things up in some of his articles.
> > >
> > > > > I think you're making up your support for him this time.
> > >
> > > If you'd like to read any of the articles where I support
exactly
> > > what I said, tell me. Again, thinking is not in the best
interest
> > of a nerd.
> >
> > LMAO. Go back to msg 3741 and you will notice that these are
NOT
my
> > words, they are actually YOUR words. (Great big belly laugh)
You
> just called yourself a nerd.
>
> Huh? Read the articles and you won't be so confusing.I think "huh" speaks for itself.
Now I have to ridicule you with a DUH! Better read up next time
before you get duh's and huh'd into the girl's gym again---and you
KNOW what happens in there!
>
> > > >and you can really see how out-of-control his writing makes
him
> > > >appear. But it takes one to support one.
> > >
> > > So now you agree he's spinning out of control. I was
wondering
> just how long it would take you. As far as me, the reason I
recognize
> it so easily is because I've been there.
> >
> > And, still doing it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Robbie can't
even
> > remember that these were his own words from this morning. I
think
> > this is pretty good evidence of Robbies real goals ... the CON.
>
> Are you still in the same post as me here--following you is like
> listen to a German speak Italian.ROTFLMAO. It just doesn't get any better than this.
I know. You've never seen intelligence work against you quite like
this before, have you---excluding high school that is.
>
> > > > More babble. The issue is not about his writings. Leave it
to
> > > Robbie to lose his train of thought.
> > >
> > > Yo--It's about HIM, and his writings are part of whom?? Are
you
> > > trying to take credit for that in yet ANOTHER attempt to
> > desparately show that you BELONG to whatever he belongs to?
Nice
> try.
> >
> > ROTFLMAO. Whew. I don't think I can take another example of
> Robbies' dedication to looking stupid.
>
> whenever I bring up how you're trying to be part of some video
poker
> club of some sort, you hurt. I understand. And I LOVE IT!!Sorry, but it's a little late to try and save face. "I LOVE IT".
And he keeps trying and trying and trying.....and now he's crying and
crying and crying....
>
> > > >As I said previously, you are all about jealousy with no
regard
> to facts. You provided nothing here to make anyone think
differently.
> > >
> > > QED.
>
> > I couldn't have said it better myself. Now, go ahead and take
that
> > breath ...
>
> But wait---MY QED stands for "Quickly Eroding Dicky"!Not surprising to see you put your OWN definition on commonly
accepted phrases and acronyms. You try and do the same thing to
simple math, undisputable facts, and just about anything you think
will further your con.
The world's in a constant state of change for the better. I'm just a
part of it that you can't kee up with.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> > > 1. You have absolutely no proof that he has succeeded in
> > > anything other than his video poker business ventures. (you
know
> > those 3 jobs he has?--he's good at all of them).
> >
> > > That is exactly what I was talking about. Bob has the
reputation
> > > > you long for over and over again. Did I mention jealousy?
> >
> > > > Jealousy? Clearly, he isn't hardly the success I have been
over
> > the past 9 years in pure profiting.
> >
> > > The only thing that is clear is that you won't bet him. I
think
> > this speaks volumes.
> >
> > No I won't any longer, and you've read why. What speaks volumes
is
> > when I tried.
>
> So, you're saying you JUST challenged him that he didn't really
> profit from his own VP play, is that right?It was in the article to any guru like him or math geek like you,
and
it went both ways. We both provide proof.
Translation: You didn't! If you want anyone to believe he loses, all
you have to do is challenge him. You know, put your money where your
mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you REALLY believe
that he has won.
> > > > I have more in my 401k from
> > > > working REAL jobs than any job in the outside gaming
business
> > would ever pay over 20 years! Guess that's not it either. Too
bad
> you
> > > > couldn't come up with one more idiotic statement. Then I'd
let
> > you strike out swinging - like a man.
> >
> > > Your jealousy is so obvious.
> >
> > And the fact that you have no answers here allows you to
> manufacture something in its place.
>
> I've already provided the answers, you are providing the proof.
Your jealousy is extremely evident in all your posts.Answer: You're jealous. You're simply repeating what I remind you
of
every day about me. Next.
Nice try, but your own words betray you. If you weren't so jealous
why would you even care?
>
> >
> > > > > > Heck, you can't even provide proof that
> > > > > > YOU'VE been successful, and you blabber on and on about
it
> > all the time! Your stupid math 'theories' and probability
charts
> mean
> > > > > nothing when it comes time for proof. You're sticking up
for
> > > > someone you chastised a month ago here. Recognize the trait?
> > > >
> > > > > Just the facts. I chastised Bob for being arrogant.
Period.
I
> > > prove you are a LAF. Period.
> > > >
> > > > From what I saw you looked pretty stupid then which is just
as
> > you look now. Period.
> > >
> > > Just the facts, as usual. Your typical monkey boy responses
only
> > > reinforce to everyone that I'm right on target.
> >
> > Let's see.....He's arrogant, I'm a liar. But a bafoon like Dan
> Paymar
> > is OK! Now tell me.....whom do you idolize the most out of that
> group?
>
> I don't idolize anyone. Be honest, stick to the facts and don't
talk down to anyone. Do that and you'll have no problems with me.HAHAHA--I INVITE problems with you because it's like toying with an
injured frog.
Are those frog bites healing now?
>
> >
> > > > > > 2. It certainly is a 'vocation' and not a sickness when
> > someone can say they run a million bucks through casino vp
machines each month.
> >
> > > > > That's how it's done. How many hours do you think Bob
puts
> into
> > > VP each week compared to a typical job? Just what is the real
> > > > > difference? It's really not unlike good stock investors.
> There
> > > are risks but if you know what you're doing you can profit.
> > > >
> > > > Being that he works for real - which is what puts the
gaming
> > money into his pockets - he's gotta have a life worse than
yours.
> >
> > > Another worthless assertion. These factless comments only
serve
> to
> > > make you look impotent.
> >
> > So you prefer to turn your head the other way when the bus
comes
> > by....big surprise.
>
> Just the facts, as usual.Show me one and I'll dance the jig.
I did, I compared APing to stock investing. Both are based on future
results and both require an investment by the people involved.
Neither has guaranteed income. Both are essentially jobs. You replied
with your normal babbling instead of trying to debate the
similarities/differences.
>
> >
> > > > While you may spend 80% of the time playing, analyzing,
> posting, and worrying about video poker, he's doing it even when
he
sleeps.
> > >
> > > Another impotent response.
> >
> > But true!
>
> No, you provided no evidence so it's just another worthless
> assertion. That's what makes you impotent.Explain how evidence would enter this! My word is gospel here, and
when I say it, it's truth.
QED.
>
> >
> > > > That's why it's called a sickness. BTW--Ever see a positive
EV $25 machine at Fiesta or Stations?
> > >
> > > I don't look for them, but the machine payback is not the
only
> > thing a good player adds into the EV.
> >
> > OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only disturbed
ones
> > possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict requires
to
> > justifiably feed his or her habit.
>
> Impotent response again.DEQ'd again.
Still impotent. I realize arguing against factual evidence is
impossible but at least you could make a reasonable attempt.
>
> >
> > > > Now you know why I continuously expose how these people
> > > > will even add in a sunny day and a smile from their host as
> they create a 'good play'.
> >
> > > Now I see why you make these idiotic comments. You clearly
aren't
> > > smart enough to figure out all the parameters of a good play.
I
> can
> > > more easily see how you failed as an APer.
> >
> > Oops! I forgot to add in the tournament money that you can
count
> > anyway even if you win nothing, the drawing values even when
your
> > name isn't drawn....and that oh-so-special face-to-face with
The
> > Queen! That's gotta be worth the trip! Talk about phantom
bucks.....
>
> Since I play a lower denom I can find good plays without adding
in
> extra value. However, we won over $3000 last year in promotions
which
> did help the bottem line. So, it does happen and it makes sense
to
> factor in these other sources of CASH. Its' simple math again,
you
> should try a remedial course some day.
Of course--overvalue the promos--which no one can prove so you're
safe--and another magic moment just occured! A winning year!!!
Your idiotic babbling aside, no one should overvalue a promotion.
That would be counter to being a good APer. A better approach is to
undervalue them all to the same degree.
> > > 3. "Good-paying job"...."Complete independence"? You should
be
> > > ashamed of yourself.
> >
> > > > > Just the facts, as usual. Your jealousy is showing again.
> >
> > > > you got the facts on that 'good paying job' assertions? Or
are
> > you prepared to claim that since someone else 'asserted' it and
you
> > > don't want proof, it's fine for you to assert it with the
same
> > > negligence? I'm WAITING!!!!
> > >
> > > More babbling. I said exactly what I meant. If someone can
put
10
> > > million dollars through each year with a 1.5% edge they will
> > average $150K/year. I call that a good paying job. I don't know
if
> > Bob does this or not, but it is doable. That is what I said and
> > simple mathematics support this as a FACT.
> >
> > Oh, then you're WAAAY off. That's just his thru-put at
Stations!
> > Didn't you know, he makes MILLIONS from all the other casinos
too! Right under their noses. And he writes about it and rubs it in
all the time! Right in front of their noses.
>
> I don't remember him claiming "millions". Give us a reference.You ever read his casinogaming.com columns?
Only occasionally. I got tired of the constant bragging.
> > > I have the same thing, I know I win more/year than he does
> > > or ever will,
> >
> > > Hmmm. I asked you to back this up before and you couldn't do
it.
> > > > You are a LAF.
> >
> > > > Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you ready to
> ante up the $640k THIS time?
>
> I thought you said you weren't betting anymore. Was that another
lie?I didn't say i was--you fell for that one too! The geek who
couldn't
hold back his shot until all the facts were known.....
QED.
> But, you know exactly what I'm talking about. You have claimed
Bob
> loses every year. You haven't even tried to back that up. QED.
I say he loses, he says he wins.
Offer a bet.
He supports nothing when he can, and
I can't prove anything because I don't walk in his shoes. I've
checked on some of his claims and found them to be riddled with
nebulous wording and incomplete information that I later discoved
on
my own. So it always comes down to simple common sense, and in this
case, simple common sense produces the clear winner.
More worthless babble. If you can't provide a single shred of
evidence why should anyone believe you? (expect monkey boy response)
>
> > >
> > > LMAO. YOU are the one that claims Bob doesn't make this much,
so
> > you can either back it up by offering him a bet, or continue to
> make
> > > yourself look foolish. Your choice, I win either way.
>
> Robbie conveniently skips over this one.It's all been said. Re-read for your own sanity.
The proof is IN THE PUDDING.
>
> >
> > > > That'll prove my side--which is the only side
> > > > you're talking about.
> > >
> > > Lie, you knew EXACTLY what I was talking about
> > >
> > > > Better read my article on you again!
> > >
> > > Yawn. Could you send me some copies for wrapping up the trash.
> >
> > I'll leave all that in there for you to contemplate for awhile
> longer.
>
> Is this long enough? Another impotent response from little Robbie.My guess is you just read the copy you printed out for the 16th
time
because we all know how nerds like to punish themselves.
Da plane, da plane.
>
> >
> > > > > > and those who work 'real jobs' have - as you should be
> > > > > > aware of unless you squander it thru the machines each
> month -
> > pensions and SS along with a likely healthy 401k. Respectable
> > > stuff without the need to degenerate into being a daily
unhealthy
> > casino visitor.
> >
> > > > > More babble. We've heard it all before and you haven't
proved
> a
> > > > thing.
> >
> > It speaks for itself. This one you'll like: "The Proof Is In
The
> > Pudding!"
>
> Then provide us with some of that "pudding".As soon as you do. Mine's chocolate, but unlike yours, it's fat
free.
Mine's vanilla and chocolate and is also fat free. So, I guess that
all adds up to another LIE from little Robbie ... Still waiting for
that proof ...
>
> >
> > > > So you don't get a pension?
> >
> > > So you want to change the subject?
> >
> > > > I'm glad I turned down 2 offers from IBM!
> >
> > > So is IBM.
> >
> > But I sucked them for the trips--one from Europe to Colorado &
> back. That cut into your pension.
>
> A gnat on a camels back. I'll accept the millionth of a mill
> reduction just to know you didn't make the grade.Just to know I ate something you though you were going to get is
the
topping on the cake for me!
I didn't know you were that hard up. I hear there's some job openings
for panhandlers in LV. Send in your resume.
>
> >
> > > > > > 4. You seem to have conveniently disregarded commenting
on
> > > > how/why he's gotten his wife into the same rut he's in.
> > > > Hmmm....Feeling a bit guilty now, are we?
> > > >
> > > > > Since most of us don't consider it a rut, what's the
problem?
> > > They probably live the life they want.
> >
> > > > I'd come back and try to soften the blow with that baloney
too.
> >
> > > It's nice how common sense refutes most of your illogic.
> >
> > Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking questions, and
one
of
> > them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be dragging
> > unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you when you
> > choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"
>
> A better question would be "Why are you wasting your time
attending
a class that considers proven math to be wrong?"
Now don't be playing 'switch the question' here. You know how
chicken
that makes you look!!
Yours wasn't a question to me, it was a rhetorical comment ... as was
mine. You just didn't like the truth that mine exhibited.
>
> >
> > > > > > I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and one
> > > > > > good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime
Channel & Lifetime Movie Network.
> > > >
> > > > > Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew
> exactly
> > > how you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat
out
> lies.
> > > >
> > > > Does that make sense? Are you responding to what??
> > >
> > > The "whole thing". Can you ever keep up?Huh??
> > >
> > > > These channels are
> > > > almost exclusively devoted to man-hating movies, and that's
> > because the men almost always mistreat the women--sometimes
beyond
> > belief (as we see here). Get it now?
> > >
> > > I ignored that part of your babbling.
> >
> > Certainly you did. That's like putting up the shields of
> protectiuon!
>
> I don't watch those channels so I ignored your references. I
choose
> to comment only on topics I know about. Unlike little Robbie ...
That's why you have so little experience in life--you're never
willing to learn anything.
I'm always willing to learn. The only requirement I have before
accepting anything new is that it be supported by the known facts.
You simply live a life of theory and suck
it all up on the fly!
I live a life based on facts. Your babbling only makes you look
inferior.
>
> >
> > > > > > 5. You act like I'm envious of such a feat and person
when
> > I've
> > > > > > publicly said many times how I admire the guy for his
> > > knowledge,
> > > > > > perserverance, and committment to what he's chosen to
do.
> But
> > I
> > > > > also opined on how much he is addicted to the machines,
and
> his
> > > is
> > > > a lifestyle I would no sooner wish on myself or my family
than
> > I'd
> > > > > want to sell cars. I've written a very positive review of
his
> > > book
> > > > even after he trashed mine, but I have proven a number of
times
> > > where
> > > > he makes things up in some of his articles.
> > > >
> > > > > > I think you're making up your support for him this time.
> > > >
> > > > If you'd like to read any of the articles where I support
> exactly
> > > > what I said, tell me. Again, thinking is not in the best
> interest
> > > of a nerd.
> > >
> > > LMAO. Go back to msg 3741 and you will notice that these are
NOT
> my
> > > words, they are actually YOUR words. (Great big belly laugh)
You
> > just called yourself a nerd.
> >
> > Huh? Read the articles and you won't be so confusing.
>
> I think "huh" speaks for itself.Now I have to ridicule you with a DUH! Better read up next time
before you get duh's and huh'd into the girl's gym again---and you
KNOW what happens in there!
I hope everyone that sees Rob trying to save face after replying to
his own comments realizes that this is the real Rob Singer. You can't
believe a single thing he says.
>
> >
> > > > >and you can really see how out-of-control his writing
makes
> him
> > > > >appear. But it takes one to support one.
> > > >
> > > > So now you agree he's spinning out of control. I was
wondering
> > just how long it would take you. As far as me, the reason I
> recognize
> > it so easily is because I've been there.
> > >
> > > And, still doing it. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Robbie can't
> even
> > > remember that these were his own words from this morning. I
think
> > > this is pretty good evidence of Robbies real goals ... the
CON.
> >
> > Are you still in the same post as me here--following you is
like
> > listen to a German speak Italian.
>
> ROTFLMAO. It just doesn't get any better than this.I know. You've never seen intelligence work against you quite like
this before, have you---excluding high school that is.
You know nothing. You are making it obvious to everyone that you will
lie at any time. It's what you do. You could have just admitted your
little slip up and moved on, but instead you continue to defy logic
by arguing against what is written for everyone to see.
>
> >
> > > > > More babble. The issue is not about his writings. Leave
it
to
> > > > Robbie to lose his train of thought.
> > > >
> > > > Yo--It's about HIM, and his writings are part of whom?? Are
you
> > > > trying to take credit for that in yet ANOTHER attempt to
> > > desparately show that you BELONG to whatever he belongs to?
Nice
> > try.
> > >
> > > ROTFLMAO. Whew. I don't think I can take another example of
> > Robbies' dedication to looking stupid.
> >
> > whenever I bring up how you're trying to be part of some video
> poker
> > club of some sort, you hurt. I understand. And I LOVE IT!!
>
> Sorry, but it's a little late to try and save face. "I LOVE IT".And he keeps trying and trying and trying.....and now he's crying
and
crying and crying....
QED.
>
> >
> > > > >As I said previously, you are all about jealousy with no
> regard
> > to facts. You provided nothing here to make anyone think
> differently.
> > > >
> > > > QED.
> >
> > > I couldn't have said it better myself. Now, go ahead and take
> that
> > > breath ...
> >
> > But wait---MY QED stands for "Quickly Eroding Dicky"!
>
> Not surprising to see you put your OWN definition on commonly
> accepted phrases and acronyms. You try and do the same thing to
> simple math, undisputable facts, and just about anything you
think
> will further your con.
The world's in a constant state of change for the better. I'm just
a
part of it that you can't kee up with.
Let us know when you figure out the earth is not flat, then we can
move on.
> > > > The only thing that is clear is that you won't bet him. I
think
> > > this speaks volumes.
> > >
> > > No I won't any longer, and you've read why. What speaks
volumes
> is
> > > when I tried.
> >
> > So, you're saying you JUST challenged him that he didn't really
> > profit from his own VP play, is that right?
>
> It was in the article to any guru like him or math geek like you,
and it went both ways. We both provide proof.Translation: You didn't! If you want anyone to believe he loses,
all
you have to do is challenge him. You know, put your money where
your
mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you REALLY believe
that he has won.
Did you read my reply or are you conveniently skipping over it again.
> > > And the fact that you have no answers here allows you to
> > manufacture something in its place.
> >
> > I've already provided the answers, you are providing the proof.
> Your jealousy is extremely evident in all your posts.
>
> Answer: You're jealous. You're simply repeating what I remind you
of every day about me. Next.Nice try, but your own words betray you. If you weren't so jealous
why would you even care?
Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.
> > > Let's see.....He's arrogant, I'm a liar. But a bafoon like
Dan Paymar is OK! Now tell me.....whom do you idolize the most out of
that group?
> >
> > I don't idolize anyone. Be honest, stick to the facts and don't
> talk down to anyone. Do that and you'll have no problems with me.
>
> HAHAHA--I INVITE problems with you because it's like toying with
an injured frog.
Are those frog bites healing now?
Um....frogs don't bite! They make funny sounds, they try to get away
all the time, and they're kind of slimy. Hmmmm.....
> > Just the facts, as usual.
>
> Show me one and I'll dance the jig.I did, I compared APing to stock investing. Both are based on
future
results and both require an investment by the people involved.
Neither has guaranteed income. Both are essentially jobs. You
replied
with your normal babbling instead of trying to debate the
similarities/differences.
Yeah sure. Stock investors have real jobs and aren't addicted to
casinos. They are educated on economics and actually use that towards
a goal. AP is a state of mind used for justification purposes for
their nasty habit only. AP's help no one and in fact actually hurt a
lot of vulnerable people every time the open thier mouths. Stock
investors genuinely try to do good work for themselves and sometimes
others, and the work they do is helpful to the country. Want more
truth?
> > > OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only disturbed
ones
> > > possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict
requires
to
> > > justifiably feed his or her habit.
> >
> > Impotent response again.
>
> DEQ'd again.Still impotent. I realize arguing against factual evidence is
impossible but at least you could make a reasonable attempt.
OK you're wrong. Ask the lady I just nailed.
> > > Oops! I forgot to add in the tournament money that you can
count
> > > anyway even if you win nothing, the drawing values even when
your
> > > name isn't drawn....and that oh-so-special face-to-face with
The
> > > Queen! That's gotta be worth the trip! Talk about phantom
> bucks.....
> >
> > Since I play a lower denom I can find good plays without adding
in
> > extra value. However, we won over $3000 last year in promotions
> which
> > did help the bottem line. So, it does happen and it makes sense
to
> > factor in these other sources of CASH. Its' simple math again,
you
> > should try a remedial course some day.
>
> Of course--overvalue the promos--which no one can prove so you're
> safe--and another magic moment just occured! A winning year!!!Your idiotic babbling aside, no one should overvalue a promotion.
That would be counter to being a good APer. A better approach is to
undervalue them all to the same degree.
Oh, so how we have ETHICS among AP gamblers?? What a crock!
> > > Oh, then you're WAAAY off. That's just his thru-put at
Stations!
> > > Didn't you know, he makes MILLIONS from all the other casinos
> too! Right under their noses. And he writes about it and rubs it
in
> all the time! Right in front of their noses.
> >
> > I don't remember him claiming "millions". Give us a reference.
>
> You ever read his casinogaming.com columns?Only occasionally. I got tired of the constant bragging.
Now we're on the same page--only I found out a few more things about
that 'bragging'.
> > > > > Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you ready
to
> > ante up the $640k THIS time?
> >
> > I thought you said you weren't betting anymore. Was that
another
> lie?
>
> I didn't say i was--you fell for that one too! The geek who
couldn't hold back his shot until all the facts were known.....QED.
DEQ'd again!
>
> > But, you know exactly what I'm talking about. You have claimed
Bob
> > loses every year. You haven't even tried to back that up. QED.
>
> I say he loses, he says he wins.Offer a bet.
> He supports nothing when he can, and
> I can't prove anything because I don't walk in his shoes. I've
> checked on some of his claims and found them to be riddled with
> nebulous wording and incomplete information that I later discoved
on
> my own. So it always comes down to simple common sense, and in
this
> case, simple common sense produces the clear winner.
More worthless babble. If you can't provide a single shred of
evidence why should anyone believe you? (expect monkey boy response)
Because people all know that I only say or write the truth, and no
one's ever been able to disprove any of it with fact.
> My guess is you just read the copy you printed out for the 16th
time
> because we all know how nerds like to punish themselves.Da plane, da plane.
I still don't get that one.
I didn't know you were that hard up. I hear there's some job
openings for panhandlers in LV. Send in your resume.
> > > Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking questions, and
one of them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be
dragging unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you when
you choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"
> >
> > A better question would be "Why are you wasting your time
attending a class that considers proven math to be wrong?"
>
> Now don't be playing 'switch the question' here. You know how
chicken that makes you look!!Yours wasn't a question to me, it was a rhetorical comment ... as
was mine. You just didn't like the truth that mine exhibited.
You played the switch and the reason's obvious--you were
uncomfortable with the inference because you live that life. Now do I
get the gold star today or tomorrow?
> > >
> > > > > > > I think the whole thing's despicable, selfish, and
one good reason why we have channels like The Lifetime
> Channel & Lifetime Movie Network.
Well, of course, it's a requirement of your con. I knew exactly
how you would respond. No facts, silly assertions and flat
out lies.
Exposing selfish gamblers as spouse-manipulating jokers is a
requirement of anything but what you call a con. It goes right to the
heart of an important matter, which by your response was a direct hit
on the mark.
> > > > >
> > > > > These channels are
> > > > > almost exclusively devoted to man-hating movies, and
that's because the men almost always mistreat the women--sometimes
> beyond belief (as we see here). Get it now?
> > > >
> > > > I ignored that part of your babbling.
> > >
> > > Certainly you did. That's like putting up the shields of
> > protectiuon!
> >
> > I don't watch those channels so I ignored your references. I
choose to comment only on topics I know about. Unlike little
Robbie ...
>
> That's why you have so little experience in life--you're never
> willing to learn anything.I'm always willing to learn. The only requirement I have before
accepting anything new is that it be supported by the known facts.
Then grab the missus, stand in front of a mirror whether at home or
sitting in front of the addict machines at the local dumps you take
her to, and get a good long gander. You'll have all the 'facts' you
can handle. You want to feel better about abomination?--Do it in a
group with other gurus and AP's. At least the confidence from the
pats on the back will last until you try to go to sleep at night.
I rest my case.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> > > > > The only thing that is clear is that you won't bet him. I
> think
> > > > this speaks volumes.
> > > >
> > > > No I won't any longer, and you've read why. What speaks
volumes
> > is
> > > > when I tried.
> > >
> > > So, you're saying you JUST challenged him that he didn't
really
> > > profit from his own VP play, is that right?
> >
> > It was in the article to any guru like him or math geek like
you,
> and it went both ways. We both provide proof.
>
> Translation: You didn't! If you want anyone to believe he loses,
all
> you have to do is challenge him. You know, put your money where
your
> mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you REALLY
believe
> that he has won.
Did you read my reply or are you conveniently skipping over it
again.
You're the one claiming that he loses. I don't see anyone claiming
anything about you. So, challenge him. You know, put your money where
your mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you REALLY
believe that he has won.
> > > > And the fact that you have no answers here allows you to
> > > manufacture something in its place.
> > >
> > > I've already provided the answers, you are providing the
proof.
> > Your jealousy is extremely evident in all your posts.
> >
> > Answer: You're jealous. You're simply repeating what I remind
you
> of every day about me. Next.
>
> Nice try, but your own words betray you. If you weren't so
jealous
> why would you even care?
Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.
About anyone results. I will agree that you have exposed your claims
as nonsense. You won't back them up, so I think pretty much everyone
can see they are just hopeful fantasies. "Next".
> > > > Let's see.....He's arrogant, I'm a liar. But a bafoon like
Dan Paymar is OK! Now tell me.....whom do you idolize the most out
of
that group?
> > >
> > > I don't idolize anyone. Be honest, stick to the facts and
don't
> > talk down to anyone. Do that and you'll have no problems with
me.
> >
> > HAHAHA--I INVITE problems with you because it's like toying
with
an injured frog.
>
> Are those frog bites healing now?Um....frogs don't bite!
They did this time.
> > > Just the facts, as usual.
> >
> > Show me one and I'll dance the jig.
>
> I did, I compared APing to stock investing. Both are based on
future
> results and both require an investment by the people involved.
> Neither has guaranteed income. Both are essentially jobs. You
replied
> with your normal babbling instead of trying to debate the
> similarities/differences.Yeah sure. Stock investors have real jobs and aren't addicted to
casinos.
No, a part time investor would not call it a "real job" anymore than
an APer calls what they do a "real job". They are better than most
real jobs. No boss, set your own hours.
They are educated on economics and actually use that towards
a goal.
Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
AP is a state of mind used for justification purposes for
their nasty habit only.
If you're going to outright lie then we can make little progress.
AP's help no one and in fact actually hurt a
lot of vulnerable people every time the open thier mouths.
Lie
Stock
investors genuinely try to do good work for themselves and
sometimes
others, and the work they do is helpful to the country. Want more
truth?
Many small investors lose money. Know why?
>
> > > > OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only disturbed
> ones
> > > > possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict
requires
> to
> > > > justifiably feed his or her habit.
> > >
> > > Impotent response again.
> >
> > DEQ'd again.
>
> Still impotent. I realize arguing against factual evidence is
> impossible but at least you could make a reasonable attempt.OK you're wrong. Ask the lady I just nailed.
What's your wife have to do with anything?
>
> > > > Oops! I forgot to add in the tournament money that you can
> count
> > > > anyway even if you win nothing, the drawing values even
when
> your
> > > > name isn't drawn....and that oh-so-special face-to-face
with
> The
> > > > Queen! That's gotta be worth the trip! Talk about phantom
> > bucks.....
> > >
> > > Since I play a lower denom I can find good plays without
adding
> in
> > > extra value. However, we won over $3000 last year in
promotions
> > which
> > > did help the bottem line. So, it does happen and it makes
sense
> to
> > > factor in these other sources of CASH. Its' simple math
again,
> you
> > > should try a remedial course some day.
> >
> > Of course--overvalue the promos--which no one can prove so
you're
> > safe--and another magic moment just occured! A winning year!!!
>
> Your idiotic babbling aside, no one should overvalue a promotion.
> That would be counter to being a good APer. A better approach is
to
> undervalue them all to the same degree.
Oh, so how we have ETHICS among AP gamblers?? What a crock!
It has nothing to do with ethics. Undervaluing a promotion highlights
that they may be more risky than one would like.
>
> > > > Oh, then you're WAAAY off. That's just his thru-put at
> Stations!
> > > > Didn't you know, he makes MILLIONS from all the other
casinos
> > too! Right under their noses. And he writes about it and rubs
it
in
> > all the time! Right in front of their noses.
> > >
> > > I don't remember him claiming "millions". Give us a reference.
> >
> > You ever read his casinogaming.com columns?
>
> Only occasionally. I got tired of the constant bragging.Now we're on the same page--only I found out a few more things
about
that 'bragging'.
Sorry, if you can't provide the facts, you are just blowing smoke.
>
> > > > > > Back to that false accusation again I see. Are you
ready
to
> > > ante up the $640k THIS time?
> > >
> > > I thought you said you weren't betting anymore. Was that
another
> > lie?
> >
> > I didn't say i was--you fell for that one too! The geek who
> couldn't hold back his shot until all the facts were known.....
>
> QED.DEQ'd again!
In black and white. Quod erat demonstrandum ... however you want to
spell it.
>
> >
> > > But, you know exactly what I'm talking about. You have
claimed
> Bob
> > > loses every year. You haven't even tried to back that up. QED.
> >
> > I say he loses, he says he wins.
>
> Offer a bet.
>
> > He supports nothing when he can, and
> > I can't prove anything because I don't walk in his shoes. I've
> > checked on some of his claims and found them to be riddled with
> > nebulous wording and incomplete information that I later
discoved
> on
> > my own. So it always comes down to simple common sense, and in
this
> > case, simple common sense produces the clear winner.
>
> More worthless babble. If you can't provide a single shred of
> evidence why should anyone believe you? (expect monkey boy
response)
Because people all know that I only say or write the truth, and no
one's ever been able to disprove any of it with fact.
quod erat demonstrandum
>
> > My guess is you just read the copy you printed out for the 16th
> time
> > because we all know how nerds like to punish themselves.
>
> Da plane, da plane.I still don't get that one.
TATTOO on Fantasy Island. You figured it out before.
>
> I didn't know you were that hard up. I hear there's some job
openings for panhandlers in LV. Send in your resume.> > > > Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking questions,
and
> one of them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be
dragging unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you
when
you choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"
> > >
> > > A better question would be "Why are you wasting your time
> attending a class that considers proven math to be wrong?"
> >
> > Now don't be playing 'switch the question' here. You know how
> chicken that makes you look!!
>
> Yours wasn't a question to me, it was a rhetorical comment ... as
was mine. You just didn't like the truth that mine exhibited.
>
You played the switch and the reason's obvious--you were
uncomfortable with the inference because you live that life. Now do
I
get the gold star today or tomorrow?
No, I just prefer to see the facts. Yours was a lie, mine was the
truth.
> > That's why you have so little experience in life--you're never
> > willing to learn anything.
>
> I'm always willing to learn. The only requirement I have before
> accepting anything new is that it be supported by the known facts.Then grab the missus, stand in front of a mirror whether at home or
sitting in front of the addict machines at the local dumps you take
her to, and get a good long gander. You'll have all the 'facts' you
can handle.
Now what? I see two people that make money from a part time hobby.
You were expecting something different? However, that is not anything
new. You can't even keep up with your own topics.
You want to feel better about abomination?--Do it in a
group with other gurus and AP's. At least the confidence from the
pats on the back will last until you try to go to sleep at night.I rest my case.
You have been found guilty of a CON, as charged.
> > > > So, you're saying you JUST challenged him that he didn't
really
> > > > profit from his own VP play, is that right?
> > >
> > > It was in the article to any guru like him or math geek like
you,
> > and it went both ways. We both provide proof.
> >
> > Translation: You didn't! If you want anyone to believe he
loses,
> all
> > you have to do is challenge him. You know, put your money where
> your
> > mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you REALLY
believe
> > that he has won.
>
> Did you read my reply or are you conveniently skipping over it
again.You're the one claiming that he loses. I don't see anyone claiming
anything about you. So, challenge him. You know, put your money
where
your mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you REALLY
believe that he has won.
Again, the challenge went out, it went both ways (which is the best
way to get someone who hasn't been up front to be coerced into
accepting the bet) and it wasn't taken. In your terms, that "speaks
volumes...."
> > Nice try, but your own words betray you. If you weren't so
jealous
> > why would you even care?
>
> Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.About anyone results. I will agree that you have exposed your
claims as nonsense. You won't back them up, so I think pretty much
everyone can see they are just hopeful fantasies. "Next".
Next: You're hung up on this 'backing assertions and claims up"
baloney. Just how would you write support for that which is evident
through common sense and personal investigation?? I don't think you
have any clue as to what that entails--you just use it because you're
lost!
>
> > > > > Let's see.....He's arrogant, I'm a liar. But a bafoon
like
> Dan Paymar is OK! Now tell me.....whom do you idolize the most
out
of
> that group?
> > > >
> > > > I don't idolize anyone. Be honest, stick to the facts and
don't
> > > talk down to anyone. Do that and you'll have no problems with
me.
> > >
> > > HAHAHA--I INVITE problems with you because it's like toying
with
> an injured frog.
> >
> > Are those frog bites healing now?
>
> Um....frogs don't bite!They did this time.
???
> > I did, I compared APing to stock investing. Both are based on
> future
> > results and both require an investment by the people involved.
> > Neither has guaranteed income. Both are essentially jobs. You
> replied
> > with your normal babbling instead of trying to debate the
> > similarities/differences.
>
> Yeah sure. Stock investors have real jobs and aren't addicted to
> casinos.
I think you got it.
No, a part time investor would not call it a "real job" anymore
than
an APer calls what they do a "real job". They are better than most
real jobs. No boss, set your own hours.
....and the fantasy continues
> They are educated on economics and actually use that towards
> a goal.Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
Something like that.
> AP is a state of mind used for justification purposes for
> their nasty habit only.If you're going to outright lie then we can make little progress.
You're guessing that I'm lying about AP's, yet you lie to yourself.
Hmmm.....
> AP's help no one and in fact actually hurt a
> lot of vulnerable people every time the open thier mouths.Lie
See?
> Stock
> investors genuinely try to do good work for themselves and
sometimes
> others, and the work they do is helpful to the country. Want more
> truth?Many small investors lose money. Know why?
Who cares?
> > > > > OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only
disturbed
> > ones
> > > > > possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict
> requires
> > to
> > > > > justifiably feed his or her habit.
> > > >
> > > > Impotent response again.
> > >
> > > DEQ'd again.
> >
> > Still impotent. I realize arguing against factual evidence is
> > impossible but at least you could make a reasonable attempt.
Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
>
> OK you're wrong. Ask the lady I just nailed.What's your wife have to do with anything?
The word 'impotent' showed up HOW many times as you scrambled for
words??
> >
> > > > > Oops! I forgot to add in the tournament money that you
can
> > count
> > > > > anyway even if you win nothing, the drawing values even
when
> > your
> > > > > name isn't drawn....and that oh-so-special face-to-face
with
> > The
> > > > > Queen! That's gotta be worth the trip! Talk about phantom
> > > bucks.....
> > > >
> > > > Since I play a lower denom I can find good plays without
adding
> > in
> > > > extra value. However, we won over $3000 last year in
promotions
> > > which
> > > > did help the bottem line. So, it does happen and it makes
sense
> > to
> > > > factor in these other sources of CASH. Its' simple math
again,
> > you
> > > > should try a remedial course some day.
> > >
> > > Of course--overvalue the promos--which no one can prove so
you're
> > > safe--and another magic moment just occured! A winning
year!!!
> >
> > Your idiotic babbling aside, no one should overvalue a
promotion.
> > That would be counter to being a good APer. A better approach
is
to
> > undervalue them all to the same degree.
>
> Oh, so how we have ETHICS among AP gamblers?? What a crock!It has nothing to do with ethics. Undervaluing a promotion
highlights
that they may be more risky than one would like.
As the violin plays on.......
> > > You ever read his casinogaming.com columns?
> >
> > Only occasionally. I got tired of the constant bragging.
>
> Now we're on the same page--only I found out a few more things
about that 'bragging'.Sorry, if you can't provide the facts, you are just blowing smoke.
Sorry, you'll just have to keep on sufferring thru that problem
gambler lifestyle until you figure it all out for yourself.
In black and white. Quod erat demonstrandum ... however you want to
spell it.
quietly eroding dicky....
> >
> > >
> > > > But, you know exactly what I'm talking about. You have
claimed
> > Bob
> > > > loses every year. You haven't even tried to back that up.
QED.
> > >
> > > I say he loses, he says he wins.
> >
> > Offer a bet.
> >
> > > He supports nothing when he can, and
> > > I can't prove anything because I don't walk in his shoes.
I've
> > > checked on some of his claims and found them to be riddled
with
> > > nebulous wording and incomplete information that I later
discoved
> > on
> > > my own. So it always comes down to simple common sense, and
in
> this
> > > case, simple common sense produces the clear winner.
> >
> > More worthless babble. If you can't provide a single shred of
> > evidence why should anyone believe you? (expect monkey boy
response)
>
> Because people all know that I only say or write the truth, and
no
> one's ever been able to disprove any of it with fact.
quod erat demonstrandum
quietly eroding gicky
> > Da plane, da plane.
>
> I still don't get that one.TATTOO on Fantasy Island. You figured it out before.
I have several tattoos, only what's that midget got to do with
anything?
> >
> > I didn't know you were that hard up. I hear there's some job
> openings for panhandlers in LV. Send in your resume.
>
> > > > > Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking questions,
and
> > one of them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be
> dragging unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you
when
> you choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"
> > > >
> > > > A better question would be "Why are you wasting your time
> > attending a class that considers proven math to be wrong?"
> > >
> > > Now don't be playing 'switch the question' here. You know how
> > chicken that makes you look!!
> >
> > Yours wasn't a question to me, it was a rhetorical comment ...
as
> was mine. You just didn't like the truth that mine exhibited.
> >
> You played the switch and the reason's obvious--you were
> uncomfortable with the inference because you live that life. Now
do
I
> get the gold star today or tomorrow?No, I just prefer to see the facts. Yours was a lie, mine was the
truth.
Pee Wee Herman arrives again!
> > > That's why you have so little experience in life--you're
never
> > > willing to learn anything.
> >
> > I'm always willing to learn. The only requirement I have before
> > accepting anything new is that it be supported by the known
facts.
>
> Then grab the missus, stand in front of a mirror whether at home
or
> sitting in front of the addict machines at the local dumps you
take
> her to, and get a good long gander. You'll have all the 'facts'
you
> can handle.
Now what? I see two people that make money from a part time hobby.
You were expecting something different? However, that is not
anything
new. You can't even keep up with your own topics.
> You want to feel better about abomination?--Do it in a
> group with other gurus and AP's. At least the confidence from the
> pats on the back will last until you try to go to sleep at night.
>
> I rest my case.You have been found guilty of a CON, as charged.
And you've been convicted of manipulating another person for the
purposes of continuing on with a pathological gambling problem along
with disrespecting another human being.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> You're the one claiming that he loses. I don't see anyone
claiming
> anything about you. So, challenge him. You know, put your money
where
> your mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you REALLY
> believe that he has won.Again, the challenge went out, it went both ways
That's called hedging a bet. You do it when you don't believe you
will win.
(which is the best
way to get someone who hasn't been up front to be coerced into
accepting the bet) and it wasn't taken. In your terms, that "speaks
volumes...."
But, but, but ... It's an obvious hedge. It's as obvious as it gets.
Try stuttering some other kind of nonsense since this will get you
nowhere.
> > > Nice try, but your own words betray you. If you weren't so
> jealous
> > > why would you even care?
> >
> > Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.
>
> About anyone results. I will agree that you have exposed your
claims as nonsense. You won't back them up, so I think pretty much
everyone can see they are just hopeful fantasies. "Next".Next: You're hung up on this 'backing assertions and claims up"
baloney.
That's right. If you want to make claims, then back them up.
Otherwise, they are the real baloney.
Just how would you write support for that which is evident
through common sense and personal investigation??
We already know "common sense" has nothing to do with it
since "common sense" would be to accept mathematically proven
methods. As for "personal investigation", that's exactly why we need
evidence, otherwise it is hearsay (or an outright lie) ... in other
words, meaningless commentary.
I don't think you
have any clue as to what that entails--you just use it because
you're
lost!
I know exactly what it entails and I can see clearly you don't.
Otherwise you would start with supporting evidence. The fact that you
never do this is pretty clear evidence that you have nothing, and are
probably lying about it all.
> > > I did, I compared APing to stock investing. Both are based on
> > future
> > > results and both require an investment by the people
involved.
> > > Neither has guaranteed income. Both are essentially jobs. You
> > replied
> > > with your normal babbling instead of trying to debate the
> > > similarities/differences.
> >
> > Yeah sure. Stock investors have real jobs and aren't addicted
to
> > casinos.
I think you got it.
Responding to your own commnents again? I can see the frustration
setting in. LMAO.
> No, a part time investor would not call it a "real job" anymore
than
> an APer calls what they do a "real job". They are better than
most
> real jobs. No boss, set your own hours.
....and the fantasy continues
Now, this was my response. And, you had nothing to refute my
statement. Why? Because of the obvious truth.
>
> > They are educated on economics and actually use that towards
> > a goal.
>
> Doesn't BD have an economics degree?Something like that.
I guess this is admission that your statement had no value. QED.
>
> > AP is a state of mind used for justification purposes for
> > their nasty habit only.
>
> If you're going to outright lie then we can make little progress.You're guessing that I'm lying about AP's, yet you lie to yourself.
Hmmm.....
>
> > AP's help no one and in fact actually hurt a
> > lot of vulnerable people every time the open thier mouths.
>
> LieSee?
Yes, that's why I said "Lie".
>
> > Stock
> > investors genuinely try to do good work for themselves and
> sometimes
> > others, and the work they do is helpful to the country. Want
more
> > truth?
>
> Many small investors lose money. Know why?Who cares?
Once again I've exposed Robs' lies. Clearly he doesn't want to
compare these two occupations. Why? Because both are based on
mathematically proven techiniques. Rob doesn't want anyone to see
this obvious comparison because that highlights his con. Who would
believe a progressive stock investment strategy with special plays
that violate mathemathical principles?
> > > > > > OBVIOUSLY, and they're not 'good players'....only
disturbed
> > > ones
> > > > > > possessing the ultra-creative minds that every addict
> > requires
> > > to
> > > > > > justifiably feed his or her habit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Impotent response again.
> > > >
> > > > DEQ'd again.
> > >
> > > Still impotent. I realize arguing against factual evidence is
> > > impossible but at least you could make a reasonable attempt.Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
I've shown it to you many times including the latest reference to my
simulation work. Facts. What has been your response? More lies.
> >
> > OK you're wrong. Ask the lady I just nailed.
>
> What's your wife have to do with anything?The word 'impotent' showed up HOW many times as you scrambled for
words??
Just as many as needed to describe your remarks.
> > Oh, so how we have ETHICS among AP gamblers?? What a crock!
>
> It has nothing to do with ethics. Undervaluing a promotion
highlights
> that they may be more risky than one would like.As the violin plays on.......
Does anyone else get the picture of Robbie, the monkey boy, sitting
there with his hands of his ears? Why do you think he continually
ignores facts and reasonable comments? THE CON.
> > > Da plane, da plane.
> >
> > I still don't get that one.
>
> TATTOO on Fantasy Island. You figured it out before.I have several tattoos, only what's that midget got to do with
anything?
He's the one who said it.
>
> > >
> > > I didn't know you were that hard up. I hear there's some job
> > openings for panhandlers in LV. Send in your resume.
> >
> > > > > > Oh, BTW--At my seminar I'm going to be asking
questions,
> and
> > > one of them is "Do you think it responsible/respectable to be
> > dragging unsuspecting wives and lovers into the gutter with you
> when
> > you choose the misled path of long-term strategy?"
> > > > >
> > > > > A better question would be "Why are you wasting your time
> > > attending a class that considers proven math to be wrong?"
> > > >
> > > > Now don't be playing 'switch the question' here. You know
how
> > > chicken that makes you look!!
> > >
> > > Yours wasn't a question to me, it was a rhetorical
comment ...
as
> > was mine. You just didn't like the truth that mine exhibited.
> > >
> > You played the switch and the reason's obvious--you were
> > uncomfortable with the inference because you live that life.
Now
do
> I
> > get the gold star today or tomorrow?
>
> No, I just prefer to see the facts. Yours was a lie, mine was the
> truth.Pee Wee Herman arrives again!
You can call me Ray ...
>
> > > > That's why you have so little experience in life--you're
never
> > > > willing to learn anything.
> > >
> > > I'm always willing to learn. The only requirement I have
before
> > > accepting anything new is that it be supported by the known
facts.
> >
> > Then grab the missus, stand in front of a mirror whether at
home
or
> > sitting in front of the addict machines at the local dumps you
take
> > her to, and get a good long gander. You'll have all the 'facts'
you
> > can handle.
>
> Now what? I see two people that make money from a part time
hobby.
> You were expecting something different? However, that is not
anything
> new. You can't even keep up with your own topics.
>
> > You want to feel better about abomination?--Do it in a
> > group with other gurus and AP's. At least the confidence from
the
> > pats on the back will last until you try to go to sleep at
night.
> >
> > I rest my case.
>
> You have been found guilty of a CON, as charged.And you've been convicted of manipulating another person for the
purposes of continuing on with a pathological gambling problem
along
with disrespecting another human being.
You have also been convicted of 3rd degree babbling. The penalty?
Being Rob Singer for another year and having your CON exposed.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > You're the one claiming that he loses. I don't see anyone
claiming
> > anything about you. So, challenge him. You know, put your money
> where
> > your mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you
REALLY
> > believe that he has won.
>
> Again, the challenge went out, it went both waysThat's called hedging a bet. You do it when you don't believe you
will win.
HEDGING?? Do you even understand what you're saying AGAIN? Lesson to
little dicky #46,597---He said I don't win and he wanted to bet me on
that as well as the fact that he does win. When I accepted everything
he walked away. I challenged ANY guru on my winning record as well as
to prove to me in the same manner that they win as they purport. No
takers. 'Hedging a bet' is made on the assumption that you will LOSE
a part of it. That is not the case here, as I clearly know I would
win every part. I hate to embarrass you with this again....but NEXT!
> > > > Nice try, but your own words betray you. If you weren't so
> > jealous
> > > > why would you even care?
> > >
> > > Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.
> >
> > About anyone results. I will agree that you have exposed your
> claims as nonsense. You won't back them up, so I think pretty
much
> everyone can see they are just hopeful fantasies. "Next".
>
> Next: You're hung up on this 'backing assertions and claims up"
> baloney.That's right. If you want to make claims, then back them up.
Otherwise, they are the real baloney.> Just how would you write support for that which is evident
> through common sense and personal investigation??We already know "common sense" has nothing to do with it
since "common sense" would be to accept mathematically proven
methods.
Wrong again, and I'm surprised you're this dumb. Everyday people do
things loaded with common sense, and none of it has anything to do
with math. You're so hung up on yourself and the big deal you never
were that you associate every actiopn with math. You're clearly
misled and as far away from it all as one can possibly get.
As for "personal investigation", that's exactly why we need evidence,
otherwise it is hearsay (or an outright lie) ... in other words,
meaningless commentary.
Is that why you won't answer how & what I should produce about
personal documents I've read? Why would I do such a thing to them and
probably me---just for YOU? HAHAHA!! I'll admit you're good for a
laugh and the satisfaction i get from making you look so small and
stupid all the time, but that's where it stops. I present the facts
I've uncovered, and most people believe me. You don't, but you will.
> > No, a part time investor would not call it a "real job" anymore
> than
> > an APer calls what they do a "real job". They are better than
most
> > real jobs. No boss, set your own hours.
>
> ....and the fantasy continuesNow, this was my response. And, you had nothing to refute my
statement. Why? Because of the obvious truth.
Because you're so far into your world of fantasy right now that I
can't possibly catch up.
> >
> > > They are educated on economics and actually use that towards
> > > a goal.
> >
> > Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
>
> Something like that.I guess this is admission that your statement had no value. QED.
I hope you're not admitting that you're DEQ'd again....you're
constant assumptions contribute greatly to your continued downward
spiralling.
> > > Stock
> > > investors genuinely try to do good work for themselves and
> > sometimes
> > > others, and the work they do is helpful to the country. Want
more
> > > truth?
> >
> > Many small investors lose money. Know why?
>
> Who cares?Once again I've exposed Robs' lies. Clearly he doesn't want to
compare these two occupations. Why?
Because every time you get cornered you start wiggling your way out
with "something similar" or "let's play make-a-comparison" just to
get away from the original line of punishment you're absorbing for as
long as possible. But unfortunately for you, my specialty is grinding
away at you until you nearly lose it all!
Because both are based on
mathematically proven techiniques. Rob doesn't want anyone to see
this obvious comparison because that highlights his con. Who would
believe a progressive stock investment strategy with special plays
that violate mathemathical principles?
??? See what I mean? A ramble of rambles that has no merit even in
fantasyland.
> Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
I've shown it to you many times including the latest reference to
my simulation work. Facts. What has been your response? More lies.
REALITY CHECK PLEASE!! Theories aren't fact. REALITY CHECK PLEASE!!
> > It has nothing to do with ethics. Undervaluing a promotion
> highlights
> > that they may be more risky than one would like.
>
> As the violin plays on.......Does anyone else get the picture of Robbie, the monkey boy, sitting
there with his hands of his ears? Why do you think he continually
ignores facts and reasonable comments? THE CON.
and on and on and on......
> > > > Da plane, da plane.
> > >
> > > I still don't get that one.
> >
> > TATTOO on Fantasy Island. You figured it out before.
>
> I have several tattoos, only what's that midget got to do with
> anything?He's the one who said it.
And Arnold Schwartzneggar said 'I'll Be Back' So your point is?
You can call me Ray ...
Ray who? I thought it was You can call me Al
> > > Then grab the missus, stand in front of a mirror whether at
home
> or
> > > sitting in front of the addict machines at the local dumps
you
> take
> > > her to, and get a good long gander. You'll have all
the 'facts'
> you
> > > can handle.
> >
> > Now what? I see two people that make money from a part time
hobby.
> > You were expecting something different? However, that is not
> anything
> > new. You can't even keep up with your own topics.
> >
> > > You want to feel better about abomination?--Do it in a
> > > group with other gurus and AP's. At least the confidence from
the
> > > pats on the back will last until you try to go to sleep at
night.
> > >
> > > I rest my case.
> >
> > You have been found guilty of a CON, as charged.
>
> And you've been convicted of manipulating another person for the
> purposes of continuing on with a pathological gambling problem
along with disrespecting another human being.You have also been convicted of 3rd degree babbling. The penalty?
Being Rob Singer for another year and having your CON exposed.
I'll take that WAAAAAAAY more than disrespecting another human being
and lying to yourself at every turn of the page. Thank you!
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> > > You're the one claiming that he loses. I don't see anyone
> claiming
> > > anything about you. So, challenge him. You know, put your
money
> > where
> > > your mouth is. Otherwise, all we can conclude is that you
REALLY
> > > believe that he has won.
> >
> > Again, the challenge went out, it went both ways
>
> That's called hedging a bet. You do it when you don't believe you
> will win.HEDGING?? Do you even understand what you're saying AGAIN?
Yes, if you wanted to back up the claim you made ON THIS FORUM a few
days ago, that Bob consistently loses, you could challenge him.
Instead, you want to have him challenge you also. That is a hedge. It
doesn't get any simpler than this.
Lesson to
little dicky #46,597---He said I don't win and he wanted to bet me
on
that as well as the fact that he does win.
Stick to the present, not something that happen years ago. You made a
statement and you are now hedging. You had the opportunity to back it
up. You failed miserably!
>> > > > > Nice try, but your own words betray you. If you weren't
so
> > > jealous
> > > > > why would you even care?
> > > >
> > > > Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.
> > >
> > > About anyone results. I will agree that you have exposed your
> > claims as nonsense. You won't back them up, so I think pretty
much
> > everyone can see they are just hopeful fantasies. "Next".
> >
> > Next: You're hung up on this 'backing assertions and claims up"
> > baloney.
>
> That's right. If you want to make claims, then back them up.
> Otherwise, they are the real baloney.
>
> > Just how would you write support for that which is evident
> > through common sense and personal investigation??
>
> We already know "common sense" has nothing to do with it
> since "common sense" would be to accept mathematically proven
> methods.Wrong again, and I'm surprised you're this dumb.
Lie, I'm way smarter than you and prove it every day. Just the fact
you keep copying my writing techniques is proof enough.
Everyday people do
things loaded with common sense, and none of it has anything to do
with math.
Oh, I think math could be involved a lot more than you want to admit.
You may think it's "common sense" to avoid stepping in front of a
moving car, but the reality is that the brain can compute the speed
of approaching cars which is derived from mathematical fact. We don't
need to do the math everytime since we file away this information in
our experiences. Hoever, the basis for it is still mathematical. Of
course, I'm referring to those of us with normal brains.
You're so hung up on yourself and the big deal you never
were that you associate every actiopn with math. You're clearly
misled and as far away from it all as one can possibly get.
Lie, another invention that has no basis in fact. Simply a better
understanding of how things really work lets me point out your
idiotic statements.
As for "personal investigation", that's exactly why we need
evidence,
otherwise it is hearsay (or an outright lie) ... in other words,
meaningless commentary.Is that why you won't answer how & what I should produce about
personal documents I've read?
I've simply asked you for evidence, what part of that simple request
escapes your defective brain?
Why would I do such a thing to them and
probably me---just for YOU? HAHAHA!!
It's your choice, provide nothing and leave us to conclude that it
was all a lie.
I'll admit you're good for a
laugh and the satisfaction i get from making you look so small and
stupid all the time, but that's where it stops. I present the facts
I've uncovered, and most people believe me. You don't, but you will.
Lie, no one believes you. You have been labelled a liar and fraud for
many years. How did this happen? You just gave a good demonstration.
>
> > > No, a part time investor would not call it a "real job"
anymore
> > than
> > > an APer calls what they do a "real job". They are better than
> most
> > > real jobs. No boss, set your own hours.
> >
> > ....and the fantasy continues
>
> Now, this was my response. And, you had nothing to refute my
> statement. Why? Because of the obvious truth.Because you're so far into your world of fantasy right now that I
can't possibly catch up.
You got it half right, you will never catch up.
>
> > >
> > > > They are educated on economics and actually use that
towards
> > > > a goal.
> > >
> > > Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
> >
> > Something like that.
>
> I guess this is admission that your statement had no value. QED.I hope you're not admitting that you're DEQ'd again....you're
constant assumptions contribute greatly to your continued downward
spiralling.
Once again, you attempt to claim superiority when it is obvious to
everyone else that you are just babbling. Each and every time I
present a fact you look sicker and sicker.
>
> > > > Stock
> > > > investors genuinely try to do good work for themselves and
> > > sometimes
> > > > others, and the work they do is helpful to the country.
Want
> more
> > > > truth?
> > >
> > > Many small investors lose money. Know why?
> >
> > Who cares?
>
> Once again I've exposed Robs' lies. Clearly he doesn't want to
> compare these two occupations. Why?Because every time you get cornered you start wiggling your way out
with "something similar" or "let's play make-a-comparison" just to
get away from the original line of punishment you're absorbing for
as
long as possible. But unfortunately for you, my specialty is
grinding
away at you until you nearly lose it all!
A longer than usual BABBLE. Robbie is getting frustrated.
Because both are based on
> mathematically proven techiniques. Rob doesn't want anyone to see
> this obvious comparison because that highlights his con. Who
would
> believe a progressive stock investment strategy with special
plays
> that violate mathemathical principles?
??? See what I mean? A ramble of rambles that has no merit even in
fantasyland.
You see, Rob doesn't want anyone to see how stupid his method appears
when you put it in this light. It is a fantasy to believe a
progression could help.
>
> > Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
>
> I've shown it to you many times including the latest reference to
my simulation work. Facts. What has been your response? More lies.REALITY CHECK PLEASE!! Theories aren't fact. REALITY CHECK PLEASE!!
No theory involved. Simple computer simulations based on a RNG, you
know those little things that are also in every VP machine. With it I
can simulate any method of VP play. That is a "REALITY CHECK".
> > > It has nothing to do with ethics. Undervaluing a promotion
> > highlights
> > > that they may be more risky than one would like.
> >
> > As the violin plays on.......
>
> Does anyone else get the picture of Robbie, the monkey boy,
sitting
> there with his hands of his ears? Why do you think he continually
> ignores facts and reasonable comments? THE CON.and on and on and on......
and on ...
>
> > > > > Da plane, da plane.
> > > >
> > > > I still don't get that one.
> > >
> > > TATTOO on Fantasy Island. You figured it out before.
> >
> > I have several tattoos, only what's that midget got to do with
> > anything?
>
> He's the one who said it.And Arnold Schwartzneggar said 'I'll Be Back' So your point is?
I see little Robbie is getting lost again. I guess that happens a lot
to him. Probably due to all the fantasies running around in his
defective brain.
> You can call me Ray ...
Ray who? I thought it was You can call me Al
You thought wrong.
http://www.bobcongdon.net/blog/2003/09/you-can-call-me-ray-you-can-
call-me.html
>
> > > > Then grab the missus, stand in front of a mirror whether at
> home
> > or
> > > > sitting in front of the addict machines at the local dumps
you
> > take
> > > > her to, and get a good long gander. You'll have all
the 'facts'
> > you
> > > > can handle.
> > >
> > > Now what? I see two people that make money from a part time
> hobby.
> > > You were expecting something different? However, that is not
> > anything
> > > new. You can't even keep up with your own topics.
> > >
> > > > You want to feel better about abomination?--Do it in a
> > > > group with other gurus and AP's. At least the confidence
from
> the
> > > > pats on the back will last until you try to go to sleep at
> night.
> > > >
> > > > I rest my case.
> > >
> > > You have been found guilty of a CON, as charged.
> >
> > And you've been convicted of manipulating another person for
the
> > purposes of continuing on with a pathological gambling problem
> along with disrespecting another human being.
>
> You have also been convicted of 3rd degree babbling. The penalty?
> Being Rob Singer for another year and having your CON exposed.I'll take that WAAAAAAAY more than disrespecting another human
being
and lying to yourself at every turn of the page. Thank you!
Then I guess you'll fail at every turn.
> > > Again, the challenge went out, it went both ways
> >
> > That's called hedging a bet. You do it when you don't believe
you will win.
>
> HEDGING?? Do you even understand what you're saying AGAIN?Yes, if you wanted to back up the claim you made ON THIS FORUM a
few
days ago, that Bob consistently loses, you could challenge him.
Instead, you want to have him challenge you also. That is a hedge.
It doesn't get any simpler than this.
The simple part is you. He's made claims and I've made claims. There
is a history before you, and some of it is recent. You don't like
that because you weren't involved I know. Tough love. You can't be
involved in everything you fantacize about just because you say it
should be so. If you were more important maybe it would have some
merit. think about that next time.
> Lesson to
> little dicky #46,597---He said I don't win and he wanted to bet
me on that as well as the fact that he does win.
Stick to the present, not something that happen years ago.
Or a few months ago?? You're still trying to belong where you just
don't belong. Get over it.
You made a statement and you are now hedging. You had the
opportunity to back it up. You failed miserably!
And you had the opportunity to keep in the definition of hedging.
Anything that makes sense you cut. So i'll be happy to put it back in
to make you look all the more dufusy. 'Hedging' assumes you 'might
lose' one side of the bet with a good chance of winning the other
side. I have no chance of losing either and never did. That's why you
and they always walk. One thing for BD however: He doesn't use escape
routes like you. He's up front and courageous about it.
> > > > > Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.
> > > >
> > > > About anyone results. I will agree that you have exposed
your
> > > claims as nonsense. You won't back them up, so I think pretty
> much
> > > everyone can see they are just hopeful fantasies. "Next".
> > >
> > > Next: You're hung up on this 'backing assertions and claims
up"
> > > baloney.
> >
> > That's right. If you want to make claims, then back them up.
> > Otherwise, they are the real baloney.
> >
> > > Just how would you write support for that which is evident
> > > through common sense and personal investigation??
> >
> > We already know "common sense" has nothing to do with it
> > since "common sense" would be to accept mathematically proven
> > methods.
>
> Wrong again, and I'm surprised you're this dumb.Lie, I'm way smarter than you and prove it every day. Just the fact
you keep copying my writing techniques is proof enough.
Yup, you're one feared writer allright!
> Everyday people do
> things loaded with common sense, and none of it has anything to
do with math.
Oh, I think math could be involved a lot more than you want to
admit.
Didn't I tell you nerds aren't allowed to think--just do?
You may think it's "common sense" to avoid stepping in front of a
moving car, but the reality is that the brain can compute the speed
of approaching cars which is derived from mathematical fact.
HAHAHA! Are you a joke? You just keep digging your grave! Tell us
about the 5-yr. old who does the same thing as an adult when a car
approaches--they must all be MATHEMATICAL GENIUSES like you!!
We don't need to do the math everytime since we file away this
information in our experiences. Hoever, the basis for it is still
mathematical. Of course, I'm referring to those of us with normal
brains.
I know. The 5-ywar olds had the speed vs. time graph figured out when
he was 3. Nothing beats experience, esp. if it's MATHEMATICAL
experience. You're too funny for words!
> You're so hung up on yourself and the big deal you never
> were that you associate every action with math. You're clearly
> misled and as far away from it all as one can possibly get.Lie, another invention that has no basis in fact. Simply a better
understanding of how things really work lets me point out your
idiotic statements.
Um, that's why there's a term called 'common sense' Mr. Wizard.....
It doesn't require your geeky 'basis in math' and the math wouldn't
help the normal human being anyway. Most 'brains' are capable of
creating better ways than simple math allows for. that's why the
brain is far more the complex entity than any computer ever will be.
You ought to try it sometime.
>
> As for "personal investigation", that's exactly why we need
evidence,
> otherwise it is hearsay (or an outright lie) ... in other words,
> meaningless commentary.
>
> Is that why you won't answer how & what I should produce about
> personal documents I've read?I've simply asked you for evidence, what part of that simple
request escapes your defective brain?
> Why would I do such a thing to them and
> probably me---just for YOU? HAHAHA!!It's your choice, provide nothing and leave us to conclude that it
was all a lie.
Here's where more common sense comes into play. You want me to be
unethical just for your own curiosity, when you are too lazy or too
scared to get the info to support that which you don't want to
believe yoursefl. Sorry Charlie. Didn't I tell you that pathological
gamblers have little to no self-respect? Here's an example of your
disease again.
> I'll admit you're good for a
> laugh and the satisfaction i get from making you look so small
and
> stupid all the time, but that's where it stops. I present the
facts
> I've uncovered, and most people believe me. You don't, but you
will.
Lie, no one believes you. You have been labelled a liar and fraud
for many years. How did this happen? You just gave a good
demonstration.
Which irks you and delights me. I enjoy watching you jealous folk
come on and try to discredit me while failing miserable on a very
consistent basis. They all said I'd be gone years ago, only you're
upset you weren't in on the call. You're friend who took a shot here
must also be agonizing over it...did I mention to my delight? Well,
guess who's STILL here and more popular than ever, little dicky!!
HAHAHAHA! Yup. Must be that 'demonstration'!
> > > > Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
> > >
> > > Something like that.
> >
> > I guess this is admission that your statement had no value. QED.
>
> I hope you're not admitting that you're DEQ'd again....you're
> constant assumptions contribute greatly to your continued
downward spiralling.
Once again, you attempt to claim superiority when it is obvious to
everyone else that you are just babbling. Each and every time I
present a fact you look sicker and sicker.
Hmmmm....What the fact here--that you asked me a question? Again, too
funny. You continue to step in your own mess.
> > > > Many small investors lose money. Know why?
> > >
> > > Who cares?
> >
> > Once again I've exposed Robs' lies. Clearly he doesn't want to
> > compare these two occupations. Why?
>
> Because every time you get cornered you start wiggling your way
out
> with "something similar" or "let's play make-a-comparison" just
to
> get away from the original line of punishment you're absorbing
for
as
> long as possible. But unfortunately for you, my specialty is
grinding
> away at you until you nearly lose it all!A longer than usual BABBLE. Robbie is getting frustrated.
Whenever I can bring up how I punish you, it's worth the effort.
>
> Because both are based on
> > mathematically proven techiniques. Rob doesn't want anyone to
see
> > this obvious comparison because that highlights his con. Who
would
> > believe a progressive stock investment strategy with special
plays
> > that violate mathemathical principles?
>
> ??? See what I mean? A ramble of rambles that has no merit even
in
> fantasyland.
You see, Rob doesn't want anyone to see how stupid his method
appears when you put it in this light. It is a fantasy to believe a
progression could help.
Theory is hardly important--except for wannabees and herds of course.
It's a great feeling knowing that a progression WORKS!
> >
> > > Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
> >
> > I've shown it to you many times including the latest reference
to
> my simulation work. Facts. What has been your response? More lies.
>
> REALITY CHECK PLEASE!! Theories aren't fact. REALITY CHECK
PLEASE!!
No theory involved. Simple computer simulations based on a RNG, you
know those little things that are also in every VP machine. With it
I can simulate any method of VP play. That is a "REALITY CHECK".
HELLO McFLY!!! Anyone home in there?? Simulations are theory and
nothing else. Only a geek could be interested in or make believe sims
would occur in the real world! Congratulations - You've now
solidified your address smack dab in the middle of Fantasyland.
> > > > It has nothing to do with ethics. Undervaluing a promotion
> > > highlights
> > > > that they may be more risky than one would like.
> > >
> > > As the violin plays on.......
> >
> > Does anyone else get the picture of Robbie, the monkey boy,
sitting
> > there with his hands of his ears? Why do you think he
continually
> > ignores facts and reasonable comments? THE CON.
>
> and on and on and on......and on ...
and on and on....
> > > > > > Da plane, da plane.
> > > > >
> > > > > I still don't get that one.
> > > >
> > > > TATTOO on Fantasy Island. You figured it out before.
> > >
> > > I have several tattoos, only what's that midget got to do
with
> > > anything?
> >
> > He's the one who said it.
>
> And Arnold Schwartzneggar said 'I'll Be Back' So your point is?I see little Robbie is getting lost again. I guess that happens a
lot
to him. Probably due to all the fantasies running around in his
defective brain.>
> > You can call me Ray ...
>
> Ray who? I thought it was You can call me AlYou thought wrong.
http://www.bobcongdon.net/blog/2003/09/you-can-call-me-ray-you-can-
call-me.html
Huh? Are you that neurotic to post something so stupid--is that the
stuff that turns you on??
> >
> > > > > Then grab the missus, stand in front of a mirror whether
at home or sitting in front of the addict machines at the local dumps
> you take her to, and get a good long gander. You'll have all
> the 'facts' you can handle.
> > > >
> > > > Now what? I see two people that make money from a part time
> > hobby.
> > > > You were expecting something different? However, that is
not
> > > anything
> > > > new. You can't even keep up with your own topics.
> > > >
> > > > > You want to feel better about abomination?--Do it in a
> > > > > group with other gurus and AP's. At least the confidence
from
> > the
> > > > > pats on the back will last until you try to go to sleep
at
> > night.
> > > > >
> > > > > I rest my case.
> > > >
> > > > You have been found guilty of a CON, as charged.
> > >
> > > And you've been convicted of manipulating another person for
the
> > > purposes of continuing on with a pathological gambling
problem
> > along with disrespecting another human being.
> >
> > You have also been convicted of 3rd degree babbling. The
penalty?
> > Being Rob Singer for another year and having your CON exposed.
>
> I'll take that WAAAAAAAY more than disrespecting another human
being
> and lying to yourself at every turn of the page. Thank you!Then I guess you'll fail at every turn.
Too late!
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> > > > Again, the challenge went out, it went both ways
> > >
> > > That's called hedging a bet. You do it when you don't believe
you will win.
> >
> > HEDGING?? Do you even understand what you're saying AGAIN?
>
> Yes, if you wanted to back up the claim you made ON THIS FORUM a
few
> days ago, that Bob consistently loses, you could challenge him.
> Instead, you want to have him challenge you also. That is a
hedge.
It doesn't get any simpler than this.
The simple part is you. He's made claims and I've made claims.
Not on this forum. Only you have made claims. I think it's now all
too obvious that you don't even believe your lie. Thanks.
There
is a history before you, and some of it is recent. You don't like
that because you weren't involved I know. Tough love. You can't be
involved in everything you fantacize about just because you say it
should be so. If you were more important maybe it would have some
merit. think about that next time.
More babbling. Suck it up, psycho. Admit you lied.
> > Lesson to
> > little dicky #46,597---He said I don't win and he wanted to bet
me on that as well as the fact that he does win.> Stick to the present, not something that happen years ago.
Or a few months ago??
Lie. Give us a reference.
You're still trying to belong where you just
don't belong. Get over it.
I can't get over something that is only a fantasy in your sick mind.
>You made a statement and you are now hedging. You had the
opportunity to back it up. You failed miserably!And you had the opportunity to keep in the definition of hedging.
Anything that makes sense you cut. So i'll be happy to put it back
in
to make you look all the more dufusy. 'Hedging' assumes you 'might
lose' one side of the bet with a good chance of winning the other
side. I have no chance of losing either and never did.
LMAO. I already know what "hedging" means. That's why I used it. It
so completely describes what you're doing.
> > > > > > Care about what? I expose nonsense. Next.
> > > > >
> > > > > About anyone results. I will agree that you have exposed
your
> > > > claims as nonsense. You won't back them up, so I think
pretty
> > much
> > > > everyone can see they are just hopeful fantasies. "Next".
> > > >
> > > > Next: You're hung up on this 'backing assertions and claims
up"
> > > > baloney.
> > >
> > > That's right. If you want to make claims, then back them up.
> > > Otherwise, they are the real baloney.
> > >
> > > > Just how would you write support for that which is evident
> > > > through common sense and personal investigation??
> > >
> > > We already know "common sense" has nothing to do with it
> > > since "common sense" would be to accept mathematically proven
> > > methods.
> >
> > Wrong again, and I'm surprised you're this dumb.
>
> Lie, I'm way smarter than you and prove it every day. Just the
fact
> you keep copying my writing techniques is proof enough.
Yup, you're one feared writer allright!
Evidently. Imitation is the ... (you know the rest)
>
> > Everyday people do
> > things loaded with common sense, and none of it has anything to
do with math.
>
> Oh, I think math could be involved a lot more than you want to
admit.Didn't I tell you nerds aren't allowed to think--just do?
Another psycho response. Keep up the good work.
GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's abilities
and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human
beings.
> You may think it's "common sense" to avoid stepping in front of a
> moving car, but the reality is that the brain can compute the
speed
> of approaching cars which is derived from mathematical fact.
HAHAHA! Are you a joke? You just keep digging your grave! Tell us
about the 5-yr. old who does the same thing as an adult when a car
approaches--they must all be MATHEMATICAL GENIUSES like you!!
I can't believe you would actually post this nonsense. There's a
reason good parents don't let small children play near streets.
> > You're so hung up on yourself and the big deal you never
> > were that you associate every action with math. You're clearly
> > misled and as far away from it all as one can possibly get.
>
> Lie, another invention that has no basis in fact. Simply a better
> understanding of how things really work lets me point out your
> idiotic statements.Um, that's why there's a term called 'common sense' Mr. Wizard.....
It's called language, common sense - "sound and prudent but often
unsophisticated judgment". For ages it was common sense to believe
the earth was flat and the center of the universe. Then, science
changed it all.
It doesn't require your geeky 'basis in math' and the math wouldn't
help the normal human being anyway. Most 'brains' are capable of
creating better ways than simple math allows for.
Lie. Normal brains are wired to do associative activities. Even our
understanding of math is through association. Brains do not create
better ways to do anything. Brains DISCOVER ways to do things that
are already described mathematically at their most basic level. That
is why brains are not "capable of creating better ways than simple
math allows for". Math describes the universe and brains are part of
that universe. You're simple minded statements show an immense lack
of knowledge.
that's why the
brain is far more the complex entity than any computer ever will
be.
No, it's just a different computer which will be duplicated when our
brains discover all the mechanisms. Your psycho brain included.
You ought to try it sometime.
Your responses demonstrate a very simple understanding of the world
around you. I suspect all the wasted brain cells dedicated to lying
and fantasizing is responsible.
>
> >
> > As for "personal investigation", that's exactly why we need
> evidence,
> > otherwise it is hearsay (or an outright lie) ... in other
words,
> > meaningless commentary.
> >
> > Is that why you won't answer how & what I should produce about
> > personal documents I've read?
>
> I've simply asked you for evidence, what part of that simple
request escapes your defective brain?
>
> > Why would I do such a thing to them and
> > probably me---just for YOU? HAHAHA!!
>
> It's your choice, provide nothing and leave us to conclude that
it
> was all a lie.
Here's where more common sense comes into play. You want me to be
unethical just for your own curiosity,
More worthless babble. I caught you in another lie. Admit it.
> > I'll admit you're good for a
> > laugh and the satisfaction i get from making you look so small
and
> > stupid all the time, but that's where it stops. I present the
facts
> > I've uncovered, and most people believe me. You don't, but you
will.
>
> Lie, no one believes you. You have been labelled a liar and fraud
for many years. How did this happen? You just gave a good
demonstration.Which irks you and delights me. I enjoy watching you jealous folk
come on and try to discredit me while failing miserable on a very
consistent basis.
More babbling ... I guess Robbie is stuck, yet again.
They all said I'd be gone years ago, only you're
upset you weren't in on the call. You're friend who took a shot
here
must also be agonizing over it...did I mention to my delight? Well,
guess who's STILL here and more popular than ever, little dicky!!
HAHAHAHA! Yup. Must be that 'demonstration'!
GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's abilities
and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human
beings.
> > > > > Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
> > > >
> > > > Something like that.
> > >
> > > I guess this is admission that your statement had no value.
QED.
> >
> > I hope you're not admitting that you're DEQ'd again....you're
> > constant assumptions contribute greatly to your continued
downward spiralling.
>
> Once again, you attempt to claim superiority when it is obvious
to
> everyone else that you are just babbling. Each and every time I
> present a fact you look sicker and sicker.Hmmmm....What the fact here--that you asked me a question? Again,
too
funny. You continue to step in your own mess.
I already knew the answer. You stated investors were "different"
because they had economics degrees. I refuted that with the fact that
Bob has a economics degree. You followed with your normal babbling
but everyone else got the message. That's the exact result I was
looking for.
>
> > > > > Many small investors lose money. Know why?
> > > >
> > > > Who cares?
> > >
> > > Once again I've exposed Robs' lies. Clearly he doesn't want
to
> > > compare these two occupations. Why?
> >
> > Because every time you get cornered you start wiggling your way
out
> > with "something similar" or "let's play make-a-comparison" just
to
> > get away from the original line of punishment you're absorbing
for
> as
> > long as possible. But unfortunately for you, my specialty is
> grinding
> > away at you until you nearly lose it all!
>
> A longer than usual BABBLE. Robbie is getting frustrated.Whenever I can bring up how I punish you, it's worth the effort.
LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT -- a lack of feelings or concern for the
losses, pain, and suffering of victims; a tendency to be unconcerned,
dispassionate, coldhearted, and unempathic. This item is usually
demonstrated by a disdain for one's victims.
>
> >
> > Because both are based on
> > > mathematically proven techiniques. Rob doesn't want anyone to
see
> > > this obvious comparison because that highlights his con. Who
> would
> > > believe a progressive stock investment strategy with special
> plays
> > > that violate mathemathical principles?
> >
> > ??? See what I mean? A ramble of rambles that has no merit
even
in
> > fantasyland.
>
> You see, Rob doesn't want anyone to see how stupid his method
appears when you put it in this light. It is a fantasy to believe a
> progression could help.Theory is hardly important--except for wannabees and herds of
course.
It's a great feeling knowing that a progression WORKS!
PATHOLOGICAL LYING -- can be moderate or high; in moderate form, they
will be shrewd, crafty, cunning, sly, and clever; in extreme form,
they will be deceptive, deceitful, underhanded, unscrupulous,
manipulative, and dishonest.
>
> > >
> > > > Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
> > >
> > > I've shown it to you many times including the latest
reference
to
> > my simulation work. Facts. What has been your response? More
lies.
> >
> > REALITY CHECK PLEASE!! Theories aren't fact. REALITY CHECK
PLEASE!!
>
> No theory involved. Simple computer simulations based on a RNG,
you
> know those little things that are also in every VP machine. With
it
I can simulate any method of VP play. That is a "REALITY CHECK".
HELLO McFLY!!! Anyone home in there??
POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS -- expressions of irritability, annoyance,
impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control
of anger and temper; acting hastily.
I wonder if Rob even realizes that the words he uses from Back to the
Future are from a psychopathic bully?
Simulations are theory and
nothing else.
Is that why they build those expensive flight simulators? Is that why
most economic forecasters use models (often simulators)? Is that why
engineering advances are often made using simulations of new
technology? Theory? ... LMAO.
Only a geek could be interested in or make believe sims
would occur in the real world! Congratulations - You've now
solidified your address smack dab in the middle of Fantasyland.
LMAO even harder. Now that Robbie has firmly inserted his foot in his
mouth, AGAIN, I can feel I've likely saved another victim from his
con.
> > > > > It has nothing to do with ethics. Undervaluing a
promotion
> > > > highlights
> > > > > that they may be more risky than one would like.
> > > >
> > > > As the violin plays on.......
> > >
> > > Does anyone else get the picture of Robbie, the monkey boy,
> sitting
> > > there with his hands of his ears? Why do you think he
continually
> > > ignores facts and reasonable comments? THE CON.
> >
> > and on and on and on......
>
> and on ...and on and on....
and on ...
> > > > > > > Da plane, da plane.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I still don't get that one.
> > > > >
> > > > > TATTOO on Fantasy Island. You figured it out before.
> > > >
> > > > I have several tattoos, only what's that midget got to do
with
> > > > anything?
> > >
> > > He's the one who said it.
> >
> > And Arnold Schwartzneggar said 'I'll Be Back' So your point
is?
>
> I see little Robbie is getting lost again. I guess that happens a
lot
> to him. Probably due to all the fantasies running around in his
> defective brain.
>
> >
> > > You can call me Ray ...
> >
> > Ray who? I thought it was You can call me Al
>
> You thought wrong.
>
> http://www.bobcongdon.net/blog/2003/09/you-can-call-me-ray-you-
can-
> call-me.html
Huh? Are you that neurotic to post something so stupid--is that the
stuff that turns you on??
Just the fact, as usual.
> > > You have also been convicted of 3rd degree babbling. The
penalty?
> > > Being Rob Singer for another year and having your CON exposed.
> >
> > I'll take that WAAAAAAAY more than disrespecting another human
> being
> > and lying to yourself at every turn of the page. Thank you!
>
> Then I guess you'll fail at every turn.Too late!
Nope, it's never too late for the truth. It was right on cue.
> > > HEDGING?? Do you even understand what you're saying AGAIN?
> >
> > Yes, if you wanted to back up the claim you made ON THIS FORUM
a
> few
> > days ago, that Bob consistently loses, you could challenge him.
> > Instead, you want to have him challenge you also. That is a
hedge.
> It doesn't get any simpler than this.
>
> The simple part is you. He's made claims and I've made claims.Not on this forum. Only you have made claims. I think it's now all
too obvious that you don't even believe your lie. Thanks.
So now, because little dicky just woke up and is trying desperately
to 'belong' to something, betting means nothing unless it's done
here! HAHAHA!
> There
> is a history before you, and some of it is recent. You don't like
> that because you weren't involved I know. Tough love. You can't
be involved in everything you fantacize about just because you say it
> should be so. If you were more important maybe it would have some
> merit. think about that next time.More babbling. Suck it up, psycho. Admit you lied.
And more of little dicky's introverted loss of self-confidence as we
speak.
>
> > > Lesson to
> > > little dicky #46,597---He said I don't win and he wanted to
bet me on that as well as the fact that he does win.
>
> > Stick to the present, not something that happen years ago.
>
> Or a few months ago??Lie. Give us a reference.
Read my articles from July. You'll have all the hurt you can handle
there.
> You're still trying to belong where you just
> don't belong. Get over it.I can't get over something that is only a fantasy in your sick mind.
Denial ALWAYS comes before the act of getting over it.
> >You made a statement and you are now hedging. You had the
> opportunity to back it up. You failed miserably!
>
> And you had the opportunity to keep in the definition of hedging.
> Anything that makes sense you cut. So i'll be happy to put it
back
in
> to make you look all the more dufusy. 'Hedging' assumes
you 'might
> lose' one side of the bet with a good chance of winning the other
> side. I have no chance of losing either and never did.LMAO. I already know what "hedging" means. That's why I used it. It
so completely describes what you're doing.
Is that from your left hand or the right? If I know I'll win both
sides then exactly how does this hedging apply?? Now follow the arrow
here and don't go off on one of your nervous tangents!
> > > > That's right. If you want to make claims, then back them
up.
> > > > Otherwise, they are the real baloney.
> > > >
> > > > > Just how would you write support for that which is
evident
> > > > > through common sense and personal investigation??
> > > >
> > > > We already know "common sense" has nothing to do with it
> > > > since "common sense" would be to accept mathematically
proven methods.
> > >
> > > Wrong again, and I'm surprised you're this dumb.
> >
> > Lie, I'm way smarter than you and prove it every day. Just the
fact
> > you keep copying my writing techniques is proof enough.
>
> Yup, you're one feared writer allright!Evidently. Imitation is the ... (you know the rest)
??? Another dickyism??
> >
> > > Everyday people do
> > > things loaded with common sense, and none of it has anything
to do with math.
> >
> > Oh, I think math could be involved a lot more than you want to
> admit.
>
> Didn't I tell you nerds aren't allowed to think--just do?Another psycho response. Keep up the good work.
You asked for it!
GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's abilities
and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human
beings.
Oh, you've finally followed up your statement above that said "I'm
way smarter than you"!! Tally-ho!!
> > You may think it's "common sense" to avoid stepping in front of
a
> > moving car, but the reality is that the brain can compute the
speed
> > of approaching cars which is derived from mathematical fact.
>
> HAHAHA! Are you a joke? You just keep digging your grave! Tell us
> about the 5-yr. old who does the same thing as an adult when a
car approaches--they must all be MATHEMATICAL GENIUSES like you!!
I can't believe you would actually post this nonsense. There's a
reason good parents don't let small children play near streets.
If you had had any children you'd know that a 5-yr. old is well aware
of what to do when he sees cars coming. And he doesn't need to whip
out the slide rule first!
> > > You're so hung up on yourself and the big deal you never
> > > were that you associate every action with math. You're
clearly misled and as far away from it all as one can possibly get.
> >
> > Lie, another invention that has no basis in fact. Simply a
better
> > understanding of how things really work lets me point out your
> > idiotic statements.
>
> Um, that's why there's a term called 'common sense' Mr.
Wizard.....
It's called language, common sense - "sound and prudent but often
unsophisticated judgment". For ages it was common sense to believe
the earth was flat and the center of the universe. Then, science
changed it all.
EXACTLY what they'll be saying 100 years from now when a few more
geniuses like me come along and confirm not only was my book right-on-
--but every one of my articles were so clearly relevant that I may
get a noble prize for enlightening people on how the brain is
supposed to work!
> It doesn't require your geeky 'basis in math' and the math
wouldn't
> help the normal human being anyway. Most 'brains' are capable of
> creating better ways than simple math allows for.Lie. Normal brains are wired to do associative activities. Even our
understanding of math is through association. Brains do not create
better ways to do anything. Brains DISCOVER ways to do things that
are already described mathematically at their most basic level.
That
is why brains are not "capable of creating better ways than simple
math allows for". Math describes the universe and brains are part
of
that universe. You're simple minded statements show an immense lack
of knowledge.
Yup, you're onto something allright! This morning when I took my dump
I had that 'mathematical feeling' just before it came-a-blasting out!!
But really, you're a victim of your own neurosis. Brains are the
ultimate discovery vehicle and the creator of computers as well as
everything else. Saying the issue was 'already described
mathematically at its most basic level' is not only condescending to
every human who's ever lived--it's making believe the very first
things to have entered this world were due to magic. My left nut is
part of the universe. Mathematically describe that!
> that's why the
> brain is far more the complex entity than any computer ever will
be.No, it's just a different computer which will be duplicated when
our brains discover all the mechanisms. Your psycho brain included.
So you believe we'll create a 'mechanical brain' capable of exactly
the same things a human brain is. HAHAHA!!! Only a nerd could love
that one.
Your responses demonstrate a very simple understanding of the world
around you. I suspect all the wasted brain cells dedicated to lying
and fantasizing is responsible.
The ultimate compliment from one who is on the slide in a debate.
> > > As for "personal investigation", that's exactly why we need
> > evidence, otherwise it is hearsay (or an outright lie) ... in
other words, meaningless commentary.
> > >
> > > Is that why you won't answer how & what I should produce
about personal documents I've read?
> >
> > I've simply asked you for evidence, what part of that simple
> request escapes your defective brain?
> >
> > > Why would I do such a thing to them and
> > > probably me---just for YOU? HAHAHA!!
> >
> > It's your choice, provide nothing and leave us to conclude that
it
> > was all a lie.
>
> Here's where more common sense comes into play. You want me to be
> unethical just for your own curiosity,More worthless babble. I caught you in another lie. Admit it.
Sidestepping the question hurls you back into your rut. Answer
please!
I'll admit you're good for a laugh and the satisfaction i get from
making you look so small and stupid all the time, but that's where it
stops. I present the facts I've uncovered, and most people believe
me. You don't, but you will.
> >
> > Lie, no one believes you. You have been labelled a liar and
fraud for many years. How did this happen? You just gave a good
> demonstration.
>
> Which irks you and delights me. I enjoy watching you jealous folk
> come on and try to discredit me while failing miserably on a very
> consistent basis.More babbling ... I guess Robbie is stuck, yet again.
Stuck in what appears to be an unpenetrable cloak of the truth. Just
thank you're lucky stars you're being dealt this valuable lesson
right from the master.
> They all said I'd be gone years ago, only you're
> upset you weren't in on the call. You're friend who took a shot
here must also be agonizing over it...did I mention to my delight?
Well, guess who's STILL here and more popular than ever, little
dicky!! HAHAHAHA! Yup. Must be that 'demonstration'!
GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's abilities
and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human
beings.
Enough to force you to ramble on with already-posted stuff!
> > > > > > Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
> > > > >
> > > > > Something like that.
> > > >
> > > > I guess this is admission that your statement had no value.
QED.
> > >
> > > I hope you're not admitting that you're DEQ'd again....you're
> > > constant assumptions contribute greatly to your continued
> downward spiralling.
> >
> > Once again, you attempt to claim superiority when it is obvious
to
> > everyone else that you are just babbling. Each and every time
I
> > present a fact you look sicker and sicker.
>
> Hmmmm....What the fact here--that you asked me a question? Again,
too
> funny. You continue to step in your own mess.I already knew the answer. You stated investors were "different"
because they had economics degrees.
Different from gambling addicts. You made up it's because of some
degree. Now don't wag that tail too much as it gets stuck between
your legs.....
I refuted that with the fact that Bob has a economics degree.
This is great--you didn't even KNOW what he had! That's why you asked
the master!!
> > > > > > Many small investors lose money. Know why?
> > > > >
> > > > > Who cares?
> > > >
> > > > Once again I've exposed Robs' lies. Clearly he doesn't want
to compare these two occupations. Why?
> > >
> > > Because every time you get cornered you start wiggling your
way out with "something similar" or "let's play make-a-comparison"
just to get away from the original line of punishment you're
absorbing for as long as possible. But unfortunately for you, my
specialty is grinding away at you until you nearly lose it all!
> >
> > A longer than usual BABBLE. Robbie is getting frustrated.
>
> Whenever I can bring up how I punish you, it's worth the effort.LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT -- a lack of feelings or concern for the
losses, pain, and suffering of victims; a tendency to be
unconcerned,
dispassionate, coldhearted, and unempathic. This item is usually
demonstrated by a disdain for one's victims.
You got THAT one right! You make your bed of addiction along with all
the fantasy it creates, you sleep in it!
> > You see, Rob doesn't want anyone to see how stupid his method
> appears when you put it in this light. It is a fantasy to believe
a progression could help.
>
> Theory is hardly important--except for wannabees and nerds of
course. It's a great feeling knowing that a progression WORKS!PATHOLOGICAL LYING -- can be moderate or high; in moderate form,
they
will be shrewd, crafty, cunning, sly, and clever; in extreme form,
they will be deceptive, deceitful, underhanded, unscrupulous,
manipulative, and dishonest.
You've got to be srrambling theu the cut-and-paste procedures----I'm
absolutely THRILLED to see you waste your time! But truthfully, i
understand why you post these things. You're lost and looking for
help. It just so happens you pulled on up this time that you wish
applied to you even more so than the others! Being clever is
definitely not one of your selling points.
> > > > > Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
> > > >
> > > > I've shown it to you many times including the latest
reference to
> > > my simulation work. Facts. What has been your response? More
lies.
> > >
> > > REALITY CHECK PLEASE!! Theories aren't fact. REALITY CHECK
> PLEASE!!
> >
> > No theory involved. Simple computer simulations based on a RNG,
you
> > know those little things that are also in every VP machine.
With
it
> I can simulate any method of VP play. That is a "REALITY CHECK".
>
> HELLO McFLY!!! Anyone home in there??POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS -- expressions of irritability, annoyance,
impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate
control
of anger and temper; acting hastily.
I wonder if Rob even realizes that the words he uses from Back to
the Future are from a psychopathic bully?
HAHAHA!! Now your relegated to comparing me with Hollywood actors
again! Let's get "Back To The Issue" REALITY CHECK!! HELLO
McFLY...ANYONE HOME IN THERE!?!
> Simulations are theory and nothing else.
Is that why they build those expensive flight simulators?
Obviously. That's where they check out and/or confirm the engineering
models' representations. It doesn't transform any of it into reality
until everything checks out 100% -- unlike your stupid simulation of
video poker, and totally like my strategy development and subsequent
confirmation in the casinos.
Is that why
most economic forecasters use models (often simulators)?
Apples & oranges, and a misleading assumption.
Is that why
engineering advances are often made using simulations of new
technology? Theory? ... LMAO.
You're getting ahead of yourself and are looking doubly stupid.
> Only a geek could be interested in or make believe sims
> would occur in the real world! Congratulations - You've now
> solidified your address smack dab in the middle of Fantasyland.LMAO even harder. Now that Robbie has firmly inserted his foot in
his mouth, AGAIN, I can feel I've likely saved another victim from
his con.
It's interesting to see the ramble emitting from one who resides in
fantasyland.
> > > > He's the one who said it.
> > >
> > > And Arnold Schwartzneggar said 'I'll Be Back' So your point
is?
> >
> > I see little Robbie is getting lost again. I guess that happens
a
> lot
> > to him. Probably due to all the fantasies running around in his
> > defective brain.
> >
> > >
> > > > You can call me Ray ...
> > >
> > > Ray who? I thought it was You can call me Al
> >
> > You thought wrong.
> >
> > http://www.bobcongdon.net/blog/2003/09/you-can-call-me-ray-you-
can-
> > call-me.html
>
> Huh? Are you that neurotic to post something so stupid--is that
the stuff that turns you on??
Just the fact, as usual.
Facts about what??
> > > > You have also been convicted of 3rd degree babbling. The
> penalty?
> > > > Being Rob Singer for another year and having your CON
exposed.
> > >
> > > I'll take that WAAAAAAAY more than disrespecting another
human
> > being
> > > and lying to yourself at every turn of the page. Thank you!
> >
> > Then I guess you'll fail at every turn.
>
> Too late!Nope, it's never too late for the truth. It was right on cue.
No matter. Every moment you two have to look at each other, that's
where you think of me and the truth about you I've exposed here. Like
them apples??!
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@...>
wrote:
> > > > HEDGING?? Do you even understand what you're saying AGAIN?
> > >
> > > Yes, if you wanted to back up the claim you made ON THIS
FORUM
a
> > few
> > > days ago, that Bob consistently loses, you could challenge
him.
> > > Instead, you want to have him challenge you also. That is a
> hedge.
> > It doesn't get any simpler than this.
> >
> > The simple part is you. He's made claims and I've made claims.
>
> Not on this forum. Only you have made claims. I think it's now
all
> too obvious that you don't even believe your lie. Thanks.
So now, because little dicky just woke up and is trying desperately
to 'belong' to something, betting means nothing unless it's done
here! HAHAHA!
LMAO. Trying to change the subject again? This is so easy.
>
> > There
> > is a history before you, and some of it is recent. You don't
like
> > that because you weren't involved I know. Tough love. You can't
be involved in everything you fantacize about just because you say
it
> > should be so. If you were more important maybe it would have
some
> > merit. think about that next time.
>
> More babbling. Suck it up, psycho. Admit you lied.And more of little dicky's introverted loss of self-confidence as
we
speak.
Nothing to say? No more hedges? Only more psycho-babble.
>
> >
> > > > Lesson to
> > > > little dicky #46,597---He said I don't win and he wanted to
bet me on that as well as the fact that he does win.
> >
> > > Stick to the present, not something that happen years ago.
> >
> > Or a few months ago??
>
> Lie. Give us a reference.Read my articles from July. You'll have all the hurt you can handle
there.
I don't read a con mans' psycho-babble. I've told you that many times
but I guess you can't read.
>
> > You're still trying to belong where you just
> > don't belong. Get over it.
>
> I can't get over something that is only a fantasy in your sick
mind.
Denial ALWAYS comes before the act of getting over it.
More psycho-babble.
> > >You made a statement and you are now hedging. You had the
> > opportunity to back it up. You failed miserably!
> >
> > And you had the opportunity to keep in the definition of
hedging.
> > Anything that makes sense you cut. So i'll be happy to put it
back
> in
> > to make you look all the more dufusy. 'Hedging' assumes
you 'might
> > lose' one side of the bet with a good chance of winning the
other
> > side. I have no chance of losing either and never did.
>
> LMAO. I already know what "hedging" means. That's why I used it.
It
> so completely describes what you're doing.
Is that from your left hand or the right? If I know I'll win both
sides then exactly how does this hedging apply??
There's only one side, your claim, your failure to back it up, your
use of more psycho-babble to hide behind. LMAO.
> > > > > That's right. If you want to make claims, then back them
up.
> > > > > Otherwise, they are the real baloney.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Just how would you write support for that which is
evident
> > > > > > through common sense and personal investigation??
> > > > >
> > > > > We already know "common sense" has nothing to do with it
> > > > > since "common sense" would be to accept mathematically
proven methods.
> > > >
> > > > Wrong again, and I'm surprised you're this dumb.
> > >
> > > Lie, I'm way smarter than you and prove it every day. Just
the
> fact
> > > you keep copying my writing techniques is proof enough.
> >
> > Yup, you're one feared writer allright!
>
> Evidently. Imitation is the ... (you know the rest)??? Another dickyism??
Don't worry your petty little head, everyone else got it.
> GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's
abilities
> and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
> Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior
human
> beings.
Oh, you've finally followed up your statement above that said "I'm
way smarter than you"!! Tally-ho!!
I like to throw in a fact or two along the way. Oh, and thanks for
making it so obvious with your ???.
> > > You may think it's "common sense" to avoid stepping in front
of
a
> > > moving car, but the reality is that the brain can compute the
> speed
> > > of approaching cars which is derived from mathematical fact.
> >
> > HAHAHA! Are you a joke? You just keep digging your grave! Tell
us
> > about the 5-yr. old who does the same thing as an adult when a
car approaches--they must all be MATHEMATICAL GENIUSES like you!!
>
> I can't believe you would actually post this nonsense. There's a
> reason good parents don't let small children play near streets.If you had had any children you'd know that a 5-yr. old is well
aware
of what to do when he sees cars coming. And he doesn't need to whip
out the slide rule first!
It appears Robbie doesn't understand simple logic. Does the child run
away when he sees a parked car? What is the difference and what
exactly goes on in the brain? Let me help you out ... movement, which
is a mathematically describeable event. If you remember I said it had
a basis in mathematics. This is way too easy.
>
> > > > You're so hung up on yourself and the big deal you never
> > > > were that you associate every action with math. You're
clearly misled and as far away from it all as one can possibly get.
> > >
> > > Lie, another invention that has no basis in fact. Simply a
better
> > > understanding of how things really work lets me point out
your
> > > idiotic statements.
> >
> > Um, that's why there's a term called 'common sense' Mr.
Wizard.....
>
> It's called language, common sense - "sound and prudent but often
> unsophisticated judgment". For ages it was common sense to
believe
> the earth was flat and the center of the universe. Then, science
> changed it all.EXACTLY what they'll be saying 100 years from now when a few more
geniuses like me come along and confirm not only was my book right-
on-
--but every one of my articles were so clearly relevant that I may
get a noble prize for enlightening people on how the brain is
supposed to work!
GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's abilities
and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human
beings.
PS. The only future you, and anything you've written, will have is to
be laughed at by everyone else.
>
> > It doesn't require your geeky 'basis in math' and the math
wouldn't
> > help the normal human being anyway. Most 'brains' are capable
of
> > creating better ways than simple math allows for.
>
> Lie. Normal brains are wired to do associative activities. Even
our
> understanding of math is through association. Brains do not
create
> better ways to do anything. Brains DISCOVER ways to do things
that
> are already described mathematically at their most basic level.
That
> is why brains are not "capable of creating better ways than
simple
> math allows for". Math describes the universe and brains are part
of
> that universe. You're simple minded statements show an immense
lack
> of knowledge.
Yup, you're onto something allright! This morning when I took my
dump
I had that 'mathematical feeling' just before it came-a-blasting
out!!
Which ear?
But really, you're a victim of your own neurosis. Brains are the
ultimate discovery vehicle and the creator of computers as well as
everything else.
I think discover is the better word.
Saying the issue was 'already described
mathematically at its most basic level' is not only condescending
to
every human who's ever lived
No, it's just the facts.
--it's making believe the very first
things to have entered this world were due to magic.
No, are you really this dense? I simply stated that every potential
thing in this universe exists whether we discover it or not. Pretty
much the opposite of "magic".
My left nut is
part of the universe. Mathematically describe that!
Easy. It consists of specific cells, which are made up of molecules,
which are made up of elements, which are made up of basic particles.
The cellular processes are all describeable mathematically. This is
way too easy.
> > that's why the
> > brain is far more the complex entity than any computer ever
will
> be.
>
> No, it's just a different computer which will be duplicated when
our brains discover all the mechanisms. Your psycho brain included.So you believe we'll create a 'mechanical brain' capable of exactly
the same things a human brain is. HAHAHA!!! Only a nerd could love
that one.
It won't be mechanical, it will be electronic or biologic. It won't
be "exactly" the same as a human brain because all human brains are
different (especially yours). However, we will come very close to
duplicating most of the functions. It appears you think the world is
controlled by "magic" if you think we won't eventually duplicate the
brain.
> Your responses demonstrate a very simple understanding of the
world
> around you. I suspect all the wasted brain cells dedicated to
lying
> and fantasizing is responsible.
The ultimate compliment from one who is on the slide in a debate.
I think everyone can see Robbie, the psycho-boy, is the one "sliding"
down into his little "magic" universe of lies and fantasies.
> > >
> > > Lie, no one believes you. You have been labelled a liar and
fraud for many years. How did this happen? You just gave a good
> > demonstration.
> >
> > Which irks you and delights me. I enjoy watching you jealous
folk
> > come on and try to discredit me while failing miserably on a
very
> > consistent basis.
>
> More babbling ... I guess Robbie is stuck, yet again.Stuck in what appears to be an unpenetrable cloak of the truth.
Just
thank you're lucky stars you're being dealt this valuable lesson
right from the master.
GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's abilities
and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human
beings.
> > They all said I'd be gone years ago, only you're
> > upset you weren't in on the call. You're friend who took a shot
> here must also be agonizing over it...did I mention to my
delight?
Well, guess who's STILL here and more popular than ever, little
dicky!! HAHAHAHA! Yup. Must be that 'demonstration'!
>
> GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's
abilities
> and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart.
> Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior
human
> beings.
Enough to force you to ramble on with already-posted stuff!
I guess little Robbie is having a problem having to read the TRUTH
over and over. Get used to it.
> > > > > > > Doesn't BD have an economics degree?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Something like that.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess this is admission that your statement had no
value.
> QED.
> > > >
> > > > I hope you're not admitting that you're DEQ'd
again....you're
> > > > constant assumptions contribute greatly to your continued
> > downward spiralling.
> > >
> > > Once again, you attempt to claim superiority when it is
obvious
> to
> > > everyone else that you are just babbling. Each and every
time
I
> > > present a fact you look sicker and sicker.
> >
> > Hmmmm....What the fact here--that you asked me a question?
Again,
> too
> > funny. You continue to step in your own mess.
>
> I already knew the answer. You stated investors were "different"
> because they had economics degrees.Different from gambling addicts. You made up it's because of some
degree. Now don't wag that tail too much as it gets stuck between
your legs.....
Scrambling does become you.
>I refuted that with the fact that Bob has a economics degree.
This is great--you didn't even KNOW what he had! That's why you
asked
the master!!
Now, why would I ask if I didn't already know? It's called a
rhetorical question. Think about that one, psycho-boy.
> > > > > > > Many small investors lose money. Know why?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Who cares?
> > > > >
> > > > > Once again I've exposed Robs' lies. Clearly he doesn't
want
> to compare these two occupations. Why?
> > > >
> > > > Because every time you get cornered you start wiggling your
way out with "something similar" or "let's play make-a-comparison"
just to get away from the original line of punishment you're
absorbing for as long as possible. But unfortunately for you, my
specialty is grinding away at you until you nearly lose it all!
> > >
> > > A longer than usual BABBLE. Robbie is getting frustrated.
> >
> > Whenever I can bring up how I punish you, it's worth the effort.
>
> LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT -- a lack of feelings or concern for the
> losses, pain, and suffering of victims; a tendency to be
unconcerned,
> dispassionate, coldhearted, and unempathic. This item is usually
> demonstrated by a disdain for one's victims.You got THAT one right! You make your bed of addiction along with
all
the fantasy it creates, you sleep in it!
PATHOLOGICAL LYING -- can be moderate or high; in moderate form, they
will be shrewd, crafty, cunning, sly, and clever; in extreme form,
they will be deceptive, deceitful, underhanded, unscrupulous,
manipulative, and dishonest.
> > > You see, Rob doesn't want anyone to see how stupid his method
> > appears when you put it in this light. It is a fantasy to
believe
a progression could help.
> >
> > Theory is hardly important--except for wannabees and nerds of
> course. It's a great feeling knowing that a progression WORKS!
>
> PATHOLOGICAL LYING -- can be moderate or high; in moderate form,
they
> will be shrewd, crafty, cunning, sly, and clever; in extreme
form,
> they will be deceptive, deceitful, underhanded, unscrupulous,
> manipulative, and dishonest.You've got to be srrambling theu the cut-and-paste procedures----
I'm
absolutely THRILLED to see you waste your time!
But it's so easy. Bring up two browsers, cut from one, paste into the
other. Now, that I've educated you again, made you look impotent
again, exposed your psycho tendencies again ... tell us how it feels.
But truthfully,
ROTFLMAO.
i
understand why you post these things. You're lost and looking for
help. It just so happens you pulled on up this time that you wish
applied to you even more so than the others! Being clever is
definitely not one of your selling points.
More psycho-babble. It won't stop me from posting the truth.
> > > > > > Show me supporting evidence that only a nerd could show!
> > > > >
> > > > > I've shown it to you many times including the latest
> reference to
> > > > my simulation work. Facts. What has been your response?
More
> lies.
> > > >
> > > > REALITY CHECK PLEASE!! Theories aren't fact. REALITY CHECK
> > PLEASE!!
> > >
> > > No theory involved. Simple computer simulations based on a
RNG,
> you
> > > know those little things that are also in every VP machine.
With
> it
> > I can simulate any method of VP play. That is a "REALITY CHECK".
> >
> > HELLO McFLY!!! Anyone home in there??
>
> POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS -- expressions of irritability,
annoyance,
> impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate
control
> of anger and temper; acting hastily.
>
> I wonder if Rob even realizes that the words he uses from Back to
the Future are from a psychopathic bully?HAHAHA!! Now your relegated to comparing me with Hollywood actors
again!
No, not actors ... they are characters from a FICTIONAL story. Don't
you even know the difference?
Let's get "Back To The Issue" REALITY CHECK!! HELLO
McFLY...ANYONE HOME IN THERE!?!
QED.
>
> > Simulations are theory and nothing else.
>
> Is that why they build those expensive flight simulators?Obviously. That's where they check out and/or confirm the
engineering
models' representations. It doesn't transform any of it into
reality
until everything checks out 100% -- unlike your stupid simulation
of
video poker, and totally like my strategy development and
subsequent
confirmation in the casinos.
All of the simulators I mentioned are significantly more complex than
the VP play simulator I wrote. This demonstrates what a simple game
VP is. You play a hand, get one of 10-15 possible results based on an
RNG and repeat. That's why it is so easy to PROVE that your strategy
is a con. Adding in the progression and your ridiculous subgoals took
about 50 lines of code, that's it. I spent more time building the
various game probability tables and formating the output.
Is that why
> most economic forecasters use models (often simulators)?Apples & oranges, and a misleading assumption.
You stated "Simulations are theory and nothing else", I used clear
and reasonable examples to PROVE they are much more than "theory".
Is that why
> engineering advances are often made using simulations of new
> technology? Theory? ... LMAO.You're getting ahead of yourself and are looking doubly stupid.
You stated "Simulations are theory and nothing else", I used clear
and reasonable examples to PROVE they are much more than "theory".
Only a liar would claim otherwise.
>
> > Only a geek could be interested in or make believe sims
> > would occur in the real world! Congratulations - You've now
> > solidified your address smack dab in the middle of Fantasyland.
>
> LMAO even harder. Now that Robbie has firmly inserted his foot in
his mouth, AGAIN, I can feel I've likely saved another victim from
his con.It's interesting to see the ramble emitting from one who resides in
fantasyland.
Just the facts, as usual.