vpFREE2 Forums

New Reader - Singer Warning

#1

Since an Administrator chooses to deliberately
misunderstand:

If you are new to this area, you should know about the
danger presented by Rob Singer.

He is a shill for the video poker operators. He
deliberately presents known losing strategies.
He tells players to gamble higher sums when
they are losing. He tells players to ignore the
mathematical structure of VP, and to not seek higher
return machines.

In addition to those known ways to increase the
probability of losing,
he says he has a "special play" method. There are no
special plays in a negative expectancy game. All plays
are the same. Don't be tempted to be conned out of
any money to find out what a "special play" is.

Singer has repeatedly been shown to use email aliases
in these forums to bolster his fallacious positions.
Keep that in mind as you examine these forums.

This thread -
http://forums.lasvegasadvisor.com/messageview.cfm?catid=36&threadid=162611&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

will show you Singer refusing to demonstrate that his
method works. "I cannot play when observed or
distracted." See especially page 3 of that thread. (A
discussion I had nothing to do with.)

This thread -
http://forums.lasvegasadvisor.com/messageview.cfm?catid=36&threadid=161879&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

is worth examining for the consensus that Singer is on
the take from casinos.(A discussion I had nothing tp
do with.)

Singer wants you to lose. He is a thinly concealed
representative of the VP industry.

···

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

#2

I think that I must disagree with you.

I think that he honestly believes in his hype. I also think that he
craves attention, and what better way than to disseminate a
controversial theory.

If it REALLY worked, he would now be a multi-millionaire and he is not
one.

···

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:50:18 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:

Since an Administrator chooses to deliberately
misunderstand:

If you are new to this area, you should know about the
danger presented by Rob Singer.

He is a shill for the video poker operators. He
deliberately presents known losing strategies.
He tells players to gamble higher sums when
they are losing. He tells players to ignore the
mathematical structure of VP, and to not seek higher
return machines.

In addition to those known ways to increase the
probability of losing,
he says he has a "special play" method. There are no
special plays in a negative expectancy game. All plays
are the same. Don't be tempted to be conned out of
any money to find out what a "special play" is.

Singer has repeatedly been shown to use email aliases
in these forums to bolster his fallacious positions.
Keep that in mind as you examine these forums.

This thread -
http://forums.lasvegasadvisor.com/messageview.cfm?catid=36&threadid=162611&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

will show you Singer refusing to demonstrate that his
method works. "I cannot play when observed or
distracted." See especially page 3 of that thread. (A
discussion I had nothing to do with.)

This thread -
http://forums.lasvegasadvisor.com/messageview.cfm?catid=36&threadid=161879&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

is worth examining for the consensus that Singer is on
the take from casinos.(A discussion I had nothing tp
do with.)

Singer wants you to lose. He is a thinly concealed
representative of the VP industry.

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

Yahoo! Groups Links

#3

What's the matter Thompson, your frivilous & jealous posts being
watered down just like they are on Fezzik's?

How'dya like them Patriots yeaterday? Really burns you up, doesn't it?

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, jim thompson <meldrone@y...> wrote:

Since an Administrator chooses to deliberately
misunderstand:
If you are new to this area, you should know about the
danger presented by Rob Singer.

#4

C'mon Elliott. Obviously I believe in my 'hype' because I live it.
You don't believe it because you don't know enough about it and even
if you did, do you have the cranal ability to be able to do it? In
all these years you criticize without ever asking questions on the
strategy's exact implementation. That's why I see a red flag.

I'm not disseminating any theories. I'm first trying to keep people
from falling into the long-term theory trap as SOLD by the gurus, and
the only reason it's controversial is because it's hitting them in
the pockets. Anyone else who's offended is either irritated because
they didn't think of what I did first, or because they don't win and
they hate people who do. I'm the only one who actually can stand
sitting next to a person being paid for a big Royal, because I win
almost at will. And THAT's what bugs everyone about me.

No, I'm not a 'multi' millionaire, I have not made a million dollars
from video poker, and I probably am not stupid or low-class enough to
play often enough or long enough to get to that point. But my life
and ability to play vp as I do was not built from gambling either.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Elliott L. Shapiro
<elliotts2345@e...> wrote:

I think that I must disagree with you.

I think that he honestly believes in his hype. I also think that he
craves attention, and what better way than to disseminate a
controversial theory.

If it REALLY worked, he would now be a multi-millionaire and he is

not

one.

>Since an Administrator chooses to deliberately
>misunderstand:
>
>If you are new to this area, you should know about the
>danger presented by Rob Singer.
>
>
>He is a shill for the video poker operators. He
>deliberately presents known losing strategies.
>He tells players to gamble higher sums when
>they are losing. He tells players to ignore the
>mathematical structure of VP, and to not seek higher
>return machines.
>
>
>In addition to those known ways to increase the
>probability of losing,
>he says he has a "special play" method. There are no
>special plays in a negative expectancy game. All plays
>are the same. Don't be tempted to be conned out of
>any money to find out what a "special play" is.
>
>Singer has repeatedly been shown to use email aliases
>in these forums to bolster his fallacious positions.
>Keep that in mind as you examine these forums.
>
>This thread -
>http://forums.lasvegasadvisor.com/messageview.cfm?

catid=36&threadid=162611&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

>
>will show you Singer refusing to demonstrate that his
>method works. "I cannot play when observed or
>distracted." See especially page 3 of that thread. (A
>discussion I had nothing to do with.)
>
>This thread -
>http://forums.lasvegasadvisor.com/messageview.cfm?

catid=36&threadid=161879&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

···

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:50:18 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>
>is worth examining for the consensus that Singer is on
>the take from casinos.(A discussion I had nothing tp
>do with.)
>
>Singer wants you to lose. He is a thinly concealed
>representative of the VP industry.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

#5

<<Obviously I believe in my 'hype' because I live it. >>

Lie. You consistently refuse to let anyone verify that you actually play
your system.

<<You don't believe it because you don't know enough about it>>

Lie. Anyone with rudimentary probability theory knows enough about it to
prove it's a fraud. Negative games cannot be combined for positive
expectation. This is not opinion. It is math.

<<I'm not disseminating any theories. I'm first trying to keep people from
falling into the long-term theory trap as SOLD by the gurus, and the only
reason it's controversial is because it's hitting them in the pockets.>>

Lie. You haven't impacted anyone and you are promoting a nonsensical theory.
Also, the gurus know a lot about both short and long terms and can tell you
exactly what a player's chances are of having any particular result after
any particular length of play.

<<I win almost at will.>>

Lie. I and others have offered to bet you on that and you always chicken
out.

<<I have not made a million dollars from video poker>>

Truth!

<<my life and ability to play vp as I do was not built from gambling
either.>>

Truth!

I like this trend, Rob.

Cogno

#6

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cogno Scienti"
<cognoscienti@g...> wrote:

<<Obviously I believe in my 'hype' because I live it. >>

Lie. You consistently refuse to let anyone verify that you actually
play your system.

Wrong. Both Publishers have witnessed my play several times.

Lie. Anyone with rudimentary probability theory knows enough about

it to

prove it's a fraud. Negative games cannot be combined for positive
expectation. This is not opinion. It is math.

Wrong again. I don't play to a theory and that's why I am able to win
so much and so often. When you finish the anger over that then let me
know when i can help you.

<<I'm not disseminating any theories. I'm first trying to keep

people from

falling into the long-term theory trap as SOLD by the gurus, and

the only

reason it's controversial is because it's hitting them in the

pockets.>>

Lie. You haven't impacted anyone and you are promoting a

nonsensical theory.

Also, the gurus know a lot about both short and long terms and can

tell you

exactly what a player's chances are of having any particular result

after

any particular length of play.

The 'gurus' and the math geeks have limited vision and will always
fail--like most of them already have. Guess why all of them either
work, live with retirees with 401k's to burn thru, or sell anything
they can get their hands on. Theory is for those who can't stand the
truth. And that's this bunch for sure.

<<I win almost at will.>>

Lie. I and others have offered to bet you on that and you always

chicken out.

Again, mislead and wrong. I can prove I've won like I always say I
have. Care to bet on that?

<<I have not made a million dollars from video poker>>

Truth!

<<my life and ability to play vp as I do was not built from gambling
either.>>

Truth!

I like this trend, Rob.

Sort of like "Million Dollar Video Poker" in reverse to you, right?

#7

Lie. You consistently refuse to let anyone verify that you actually
play your system.

<<Wrong. Both Publishers have witnessed my play several times.>>

Names and email addresses. I will verify and see what they have to say.

Lie. Anyone with rudimentary probability theory knows enough about

it to

prove it's a fraud. Negative games cannot be combined for positive
expectation. This is not opinion. It is math.

<<Wrong again. I don't play to a theory and that's why I am able to win so
much and so often.>>

Lie. This is like saying you can fly because you don't use the theory of
gravity. This response 100% proves you're a fraud.

<<The 'gurus' and the math geeks have limited vision and will always
fail--like most of them already have.>>

Lie. Provide the names of which gurus and math geeks have failed. I will
verify.

<<Guess why all of them either work, live with retirees with 401k's to burn
thru, or sell anything they can get their hands on.>>

Lie. Advantage players make money from gambling, not "burn" it.

<<Theory is for those who can't stand the truth.>>

Another of the stupidest things you've ever said. Maybe I'll start a
collection.

<<I win almost at will.>>

Lie. I and others have offered to bet you on that and you always

chicken out.

<<Again, mislead and wrong. I can prove I've won like I always say I
have. Care to bet on that? >>

I would be happy to bet that you cannot prove you've won to my satisfaction.

<<Sort of like "Million Dollar Video Poker" in reverse to you, right?>>

It would take you a while to lose a million playing your system, but with
perseverance I believe you could do it.

Cogno

#8

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cogno Scienti"
<cognoscienti@g...> wrote:

<<Wrong. Both Publishers have witnessed my play several times.>>

Names and email addresses. I will verify and see what they have to

say.

Maryann Guberman Gambler's Bookshop in LV.
The Publisher of my paper GT died this past year, otherwise he'd have
been glad to confirm. You see, he fired Dancer and Skippy Hughes for
their nonsensical mathematical rants, similar to the baloney you keep
spewing here. That's also why he asked me to write--for the truth for
a change.

Lie. This is like saying you can fly because you don't use the
theory of gravity. This response 100% proves you're a fraud.

Have you no other words in your vocabulary? Exactly why i win and you
cannot. You may win 'phantom bucks' as most of those like you will
say they do, but as far as real money goes, you do not win a dime.

<<The 'gurus' and the math geeks have limited vision and will always

fail--like most of them already have.>>

Lie. Provide the names of which gurus and math geeks have failed. I
will verify.

I only need to provide one and you can then go down the totem pole
from there as you wish. Yuri, the famous UNLV math professor who 4
years ago professed to be the world's number one video poker player,
who said the exact nonsense you blab time and again about how expert
play blah blah blah is the only way to win. Well, just as I predicted
here, he lost EVERY DIME to vp machines around the city and had to
resort to begging Jean Scott to canvass for money to feed his family
after he was fired for staying out of work to gamble. He left LV
disgraced, penniless, and is now in Siberia where he belongs. So
don't come back and say "but gee Rob, it could happen every once in a
while"! The rest of your heroes and guru friends are facing or will
soon face the same fate. And I love every minute of it. What goes
around comes around.

<<Guess why all of them either work, live with retirees with 401k's

to burn

thru, or sell anything they can get their hands on.>>

Lie. Advantage players make money from gambling, not "burn" it.

Right.....Phantom Money.

<<Theory is for those who can't stand the truth.>>

Another of the stupidest things you've ever said. Maybe I'll start a
collection.

People collect phrases when they have no credible responses. Good
luck with your new job.

<<Again, mislead and wrong. I can prove I've won like I always say

I

have. Care to bet on that? >>

I would be happy to bet that you cannot prove you've won to my

satisfaction.

OK, now we're getting somewhere. First, read my article from GT on my
site about an exact previous bet/challenge from another fool just
like you. In it I put my escrow up at Casuarina Casino and your pal
backed out. The article can be found on my site in the archives from
June 14, 2005 and is called "Burden of Proof In Video Poker". I'll do
the same bet with you.

<<Sort of like "Million Dollar Video Poker" in reverse to you,

right?>>

It would take you a while to lose a million playing your system,

but with perseverance I believe you could do it.

Nope, because I'd never be foolish enough to bet that much if I had
that kind of a gambling bankroll. But I'll bet you could guess who
DID lose a million!

···

Cogno

#9

Names and email addresses. I will verify and see what they have to

say.

<<Maryann Guberman Gambler's Bookshop in LV.>>

You didn't provide an email address. I emailed the general address for GBS
and we'll see what happens.

<<The Publisher of my paper GT died this past year, otherwise he'd have
been glad to confirm.>>

You'll forgive me if I assign little weight to that evidence.

<< You see, he fired Dancer and Skippy Hughes for
their nonsensical mathematical rants, similar to the baloney you keep
spewing here. That's also why he asked me to write--for the truth for
a change.>>

Forgive me if I don't consider it an honor to write an unpaid column for a
free newspaper.

Lie. This is like saying you can fly because you don't use the
theory of gravity. This response 100% proves you're a fraud.

<<Have you no other words in your vocabulary? Exactly why i win and you
cannot. You may win 'phantom bucks' as most of those like you will
say they do, but as far as real money goes, you do not win a dime.>>

Lie. I have won far more than you even lie about. You make no sense. How on
earth can you claim that you make money playing a fraudulent losing system
while people with an actual advantage lose? Who do you think believes you?

<<The 'gurus' and the math geeks have limited vision and will always

fail--like most of them already have.>>

Lie. Provide the names of which gurus and math geeks have failed. I
will verify.

<<I only need to provide one>>

No, you claimed "most of them" already have failed. Provide the names of
"most of them." We all know none of them has failed, liar.

<<Yuri, the famous UNLV math professor who 4
years ago professed to be the world's number one video poker player, >>

Never heard of him and neither has Google. Liar.

<<The rest of your heroes and guru friends are facing or will
soon face the same fate.>>

Why would that be? Do you have a mathematical theory that predicts they will
all go broke? Or is it "common sense"?

<<What goes
around comes around.>>

Wow. Scary words from a liar, fraud and welsher such as yourself.

<<Guess why all of them either work, live with retirees with 401k's

to burn

thru, or sell anything they can get their hands on.>>

Lie. Advantage players make money from gambling, not "burn" it.

<<Right.....Phantom Money.>>

You've coined that phrase as an ignorant ridiculing of the gambler's concept
of "expected value." Yet you don't say that intelligent gamblers know not
only their EV but their chance of being ahead of or behind it, and manage
their bankroll and bet size accordingly. And how ironic that you ridicule
intelligent gambling when your system is inferior in every way!

<<People collect phrases when they have no credible responses.>>

That certainly applies to you: "undeniable truth"..."gurus and
geeks"..."phantom money"...

I would be happy to bet that you cannot prove you've won to my

satisfaction.

<<OK, now we're getting somewhere. First, read my article from GT on my
site about an exact previous bet/challenge from another fool just
like you. In it I put my escrow up at Casuarina Casino and your pal
backed out. The article can be found on my site in the archives from
June 14, 2005 and is called "Burden of Proof In Video Poker". I'll do
the same bet with you.>>

It would be trivially easy to fake a winning record like that. No, you'd
have to prove it to my satisfaction. But as everyone else has told you, even
if you did catch the 100-to-1 shot and win $600k playing negative games,
you'd STILL be a liar and a fraud.

Now if you're willing to take a bet on future results, I'm interested. I've
already proposed several. But you'll chicken out as always.

<<ut I'll bet you could guess who
DID lose a million!>>

No, who?

Cogno

#10

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cogno Scienti"
<cognoscienti@g...> wrote:

<<Maryann Guberman Gambler's Bookshop in LV.>>

You didn't provide an email address. I emailed the general address
for GBS and we'll see what happens.

Good for you.

You'll forgive me if I assign little weight to that evidence.

So based on the pending confirmation on one or two people, are you
prepared to endorse the fact that I do what I say I do and how I say
I do it? Or will you do what all the others have done and backed out
by saying "But gee Rob, one or two confirmations in no way proves
anything"? Let me guess.

Forgive me if I don't consider it an honor to write an unpaid
column for a free newspaper.

Let's see....in the business longer than any other gaming publication
(35 years). Better check with the advertisers & casino sportsbooks
and slot clubs and see just how much "free" really is.
  

Lie. I have won far more than you even lie about.

So it has been said. You don't see me asking for proof do you? that's
because you want it because you know I'm right. I believe nothing
about you.

No, you claimed "most of them" already have failed. Provide the

names of "most of them." We all know none of them has failed, liar.

Once you know the failures of Yuri the Geek, you'll automatically
understand the rest. And I can't provide anything else about anyone
because of the US Citizen Privacy Act.

Never heard of him and neither has Google. Liar.

Go ahead. Make a post on vpfree and see if your Queen or any of the
other nerds have "never heard of him".

<<The rest of your heroes and guru friends are facing or will
soon face the same fate.>>

Why would that be? Do you have a mathematical theory that predicts

they will all go broke? Or is it "common sense"?

They're all gamblers who deny they have a problem or even gamble for
that matter. They prefer the much more comforting "I'm an Advantage
player!"

You've coined that phrase as an ignorant ridiculing of the

gambler's concept

of "expected value." Yet you don't say that intelligent gamblers

know not

only their EV but their chance of being ahead of or behind it, and

manage

their bankroll and bet size accordingly. And how ironic that you

ridicule

intelligent gambling when your system is inferior in every way!

Phantom money.....Ha! You're probably making believe you're earning
phantom bucks right now since there's tournaments and feel-
good/rope 'em in promotions going on all over at this very moment.
  

<<OK, now we're getting somewhere. First, read my article from GT

on my

site about an exact previous bet/challenge from another fool just
like you. In it I put my escrow up at Casuarina Casino and your pal
backed out. The article can be found on my site in the archives

from

June 14, 2005 and is called "Burden of Proof In Video Poker". I'll

do

the same bet with you.>>

It would be trivially easy to fake a winning record like that. No,

you'd

have to prove it to my satisfaction. But as everyone else has told

you, even

if you did catch the 100-to-1 shot and win $600k playing negative

games,

you'd STILL be a liar and a fraud.

Typical answer from a coward. Tell me. How with all that implied
intellect could a docmented gambling record be falsified? If I'm
betting and actually put up the escrow, with the fool coward from the
radio, wouldn't you think I'd be fairly sure I could prove it? And I
even offered (and offer) to pay for a Nevada arbitrator who's
decision will be final if you don't believe the proof.

Now if you're willing to take a bet on future results, I'm

interested. I'vealready proposed several. But you'll chicken out as
always.

And just how do you propose to do that? I'm listening. You have not
proposed anything clear as yet. Give it in detail and i'll listen.
Don't forget to say how many sessions it will take to verify before
you endorse my strategy as the best winning strategy you have ever
seen. that's the loophole the radio fool also weasled out on. You got
the stomach for it?

<<ut I'll bet you could guess who

DID lose a million!>>

No, who?

So who claims to have "won a million"?

#11

<<Yuri, the famous UNLV math professor who 4
years ago professed to be the world's number one video poker player, >>

Never heard of him and neither has Google. Liar.

There are 884 information sites whe you put in his complete name.
Yuri Sorkin

CF

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#12

Well Congo, if CF can do it and you're the self-proclaimed genius here,
not too impressive..... However, here's one of the hits that clearly
shows this loser is in cahoots with another all-time great--Dan the Man
Paymar. Ever heard of him?? He scrambled out of LV and into New Mexico?
after the machines got too much a piece of him. A pair that'll beat a
full house.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Cardfather@A... wrote:

<<Yuri, the famous UNLV math professor who 4
years ago professed to be the world's number one video poker player,

Never heard of him and neither has Google. Liar.

There are 884 information sites whe you put in his complete name.
Yuri Sorkin

CF

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#13

<<So based on the pending confirmation on one or two people, are you
prepared to endorse the fact that I do what I say I do and how I say I do
it?>>

I would never endorse you based on your manners alone. But as other smart
people have told you, a confirmation of your results would prove nothing
other than that you were extraordinarily lucky. Your system is a proven
fraud and you are a proved liar and welsher.

Forgive me if I don't consider it an honor to write an unpaid column
for a free newspaper.

<<Let's see....in the business longer than any other gaming publication
(35 years).>>

Lie. The Daily Racing Form has been in business since 1894.

<<Once you know the failures of Yuri the Geek, you'll automatically
understand the rest.>>

You claimed most of the gurus failed. That was a lie. There are 66 hits in
Google for "yuri sorkin" "video poker". Nothing supports your claim either
that he is a guru or that he failed. And no, no one will "understand the
rest" other than that you're also lying about the rest.

<< And I can't provide anything else about anyone
because of the US Citizen Privacy Act. >>

Lie. Google has never heard of that either.

<<The rest of your heroes and guru friends are facing or will
soon face the same fate.>>

Why would that be? Do you have a mathematical theory that predicts

they will all go broke? Or is it "common sense"?

<<They're all gamblers who deny they have a problem or even gamble for
that matter. They prefer the much more comforting "I'm an Advantage
player!">>

Another bald-faced lie.

You've coined that phrase as an ignorant ridiculing of the

gambler's concept

of "expected value." Yet you don't say that intelligent gamblers

know not

only their EV but their chance of being ahead of or behind it, and

manage

their bankroll and bet size accordingly. And how ironic that you

ridicule

intelligent gambling when your system is inferior in every way!

<<Phantom money.....Ha! You're probably making believe you're earning
phantom bucks right now since there's tournaments and feel-
good/rope 'em in promotions going on all over at this very moment. >>

You really do think everyone else is as stupid as you are, don't you?
  
<<How with all that implied
intellect could a docmented gambling record be falsified? If I'm
betting and actually put up the escrow, with the fool coward from the
radio, wouldn't you think I'd be fairly sure I could prove it? And I
even offered (and offer) to pay for a Nevada arbitrator who's
decision will be final if you don't believe the proof.>>

Well, I don't think you're very smart. You already offered to bring the
issue of the $2 million you owe me before a judge.

Now if you're willing to take a bet on future results, I'm

interested. I'vealready proposed several. But you'll chicken out as
always.

<<And just how do you propose to do that? I'm listening. You have not
proposed anything clear as yet. Give it in detail and i'll listen.
Don't forget to say how many sessions it will take to verify before
you endorse my strategy as the best winning strategy you have ever
seen. that's the loophole the radio fool also weasled out on. You got
the stomach for it?>>

Check the archives. I've already offered two such bets.

<<ut I'll bet you could guess who

DID lose a million!>>

No, who?

<<So who claims to have "won a million"?>>

I know many people who have won a million, some on national TV. What are you
referring to?

Cogno

#14

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cogno Scienti"
<cognoscienti@g...> wrote:

I would never endorse you based on your manners alone. But as other
smart people have told you, a confirmation of your results would
prove nothing other than that you were extraordinarily lucky. Your
system is a proven fraud and you are a proved liar and welsher.

Manners? Ha! Who cares about THAT?! Most video poker players are
slobs and low-class fools who don't know how to dress, drive
shitboxes for cars, are really of no added value to society. Thank
goodness for me. I wouldn't expect you to believe anything about my
results from others anyway--unless they told you I lost. Selective
criticizm is a favorite amongst losers who are jealous of others who
win. And I not only agree with your statement about being lucky---it
is a staple of my play strategy. I'm no luckier than you or anyone
else. I just know how to play the game better. That's all.

<<Let's see....in the business longer than any other gaming

publication (35 years).>>

Lie. The Daily Racing Form has been in business since 1894.

Who cares about that? I said 'Gaming', and it has not always been
legal to bet the ponies and dogs.

You claimed most of the gurus failed. That was a lie. There are 66

hits in

Google for "yuri sorkin" "video poker". Nothing supports your claim

either

that he is a guru or that he failed.

Like you'd expect to see an expose' on this Russian idiot that tells
of his public humiliation.

<< And I can't provide anything else about anyone
because of the US Citizen Privacy Act. >>

I am much more of a reputable resource than this Google guy.

Lie. Google has never heard of that either.
  
> <<The rest of your heroes and guru friends are facing or will
> soon face the same fate.>>

> Why would that be? Do you have a mathematical theory that

predicts they will all go broke? Or is it "common sense"?

Common sense. Glad you asked this time.

<<They're all gamblers who deny they have a problem or even gamble

for

that matter. They prefer the much more comforting "I'm an Advantage
player!">>

Another bald-faced lie.

Prove it.

<<Phantom money.....Ha! You're probably making believe you're

earning

phantom bucks right now since there's tournaments and feel-
good/rope 'em in promotions going on all over at this very moment.

You really do think everyone else is as stupid as you are, don't

you?

No. Those who believe in the 'phantom bucks theory' are far stupider.
   

<<How with all that implied
intellect could a docmented gambling record be falsified? If I'm
betting and actually put up the escrow, with the fool coward from

the

radio, wouldn't you think I'd be fairly sure I could prove it? And

I

even offered (and offer) to pay for a Nevada arbitrator who's
decision will be final if you don't believe the proof.>>

Well, I don't think you're very smart. You already offered to bring

the issue of the $2 million you owe me before a judge.

What kind of an answer is that? Are you stuck?

<<And just how do you propose to do that? I'm listening. You have

not

proposed anything clear as yet. Give it in detail and I'll listen.
Don't forget to say how many sessions it will take to verify before
you endorse my strategy as the best winning strategy you have ever
seen. That's the loophole the radio fool also weasled out on. You

got the stomach for it?>>

Check the archives. I've already offered two such bets.

You haven't clearly laid out the parameters as I've requested here.
If it's that important to you then you'll do that. As far as I've
seen. all you ever say when we get close is that you'd never endorse
my winning strategy anyway because you'd prefer to believe it's dumb
luck without reason. That's thin and of no value to anyone.
  

I know many people who have won a million, some on national TV.

What are you referring to?

Everyone knows but you.

#15

slobs and low-class fools who don't know how to dress, drive
shitboxes for cars, are really of no added value to society. Thank
goodness for me.<

At last we percieve this man's soul undraped! I intend that this quote
will have the widest possible dissemenation.

Just for your information, Mr. Singer, I am a former employee of the
GBC. I am fully aware that your claims of verification of your system
by Maryanne Guberman are largely hyperbole. Maryanne Gubermann is a
*poker* writer and a longtime friend of yours. The only thing she knows
about video poker is that it's hard for her to play. She quit video
poker because she was so poor at years ago. During the time of my
employ there you conspicuosly avoided all contact with me, presumably
because there was a great probability that I might be able to expose
you. This while on a dialy basis I continued to sell your books.

Do you recall the individual you sent to the bookstore to purchase "The
Undeniable Truth". He left instead with a copy of Bob
Dancer's "Winner's Guide to Jacks or Better". The next day you called
Ms. Gubermann complaining that I had persuaded the customer to buy the
other book. Not so Mr. "Thank goodness for Me". What actually
happened is the *customer inquired* of me after I handed him your book
what I knew of it. I told him frankly that it was quite
controversial. *He* inquired as to why. I told him that there was no
known mathematical basis to support your claims, but that there was
also the possibility that your system might be workable. *He* asked
why mathematics should matter. I explained to him that books written
by Dancer were rooted in math and provable. *He* then chose the Jacks
book, bought it and left with it.

These things I have written are "The Undeniable Truth"!

You Mr. Argentino are not only a racist, but also fraudulent in your
claims of interest in the welfare of other video poker players as
revealed by your very words quoted above.

Brian --- A60sMan

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...> wrote:

Manners? Ha! Who cares about THAT?! Most video poker players are

#16

As far as I can tell, you left a disgraced & disgruntled employee.
I've also been told you're a failure at video poker and basically a
loser in life. Whether that's true or not doesn't interest me. Big
surprise from someone who takes offense at my description of the
typical video poker player. Anyone who wants verification of my
strategy as played with MG or anyone else there is free to get the
information directly from them--or they can accept whatever picture
you'd like to paint. Doesn't matter to me. Those few out there who
don't like my opinions or truths haven't had an effect on me during
my reign, and it hasn't stopped me from winning consistently. So let
me see......hmmmm. I guess that means I don't much care. Incidents at
bookstores happen all the time. People take shots at me regularly.
Doesn't change a thing.

BTW--The reason you perceive that I "avoided all contact with you" is
probably because I've had no interest in who or what you are. Losers
just 'bounce off of me' since I see them all the time at the machines
playing optimal strategy.

My interest in the welfare of other vp players is obviously real. The
fact that it's also obvious that most local players are low-class,
obese, drunks or all three doesn't change the fact that I'm the only
one who helps players at my expense while the others charge everyone
for everything they do. If you were smart then instead of attacking
me you'd ask for some of that help.

Good luck in your play.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Oarr" <A60sMan493@a...>
wrote:

At last we percieve this man's soul undraped! I intend that this

quote

will have the widest possible dissemenation.

Just for your information, Mr. Singer, I am a former employee of

the

GBC. I am fully aware that your claims of verification of your

system

by Maryanne Guberman are largely hyperbole. Maryanne Gubermann is

a

*poker* writer and a longtime friend of yours. The only thing she

knows

about video poker is that it's hard for her to play. She quit video
poker because she was so poor at years ago. During the time of my
employ there you conspicuosly avoided all contact with me,

presumably

because there was a great probability that I might be able to

expose

you. This while on a dialy basis I continued to sell your books.

Do you recall the individual you sent to the bookstore to

purchase "The

Undeniable Truth". He left instead with a copy of Bob
Dancer's "Winner's Guide to Jacks or Better". The next day you

called

Ms. Gubermann complaining that I had persuaded the customer to buy

the

other book. Not so Mr. "Thank goodness for Me". What actually
happened is the *customer inquired* of me after I handed him your

book

what I knew of it. I told him frankly that it was quite
controversial. *He* inquired as to why. I told him that there was

no

known mathematical basis to support your claims, but that there was
also the possibility that your system might be workable. *He*

asked

why mathematics should matter. I explained to him that books

written

by Dancer were rooted in math and provable. *He* then chose the

Jacks

book, bought it and left with it.

These things I have written are "The Undeniable Truth"!

You Mr. Argentino are not only a racist, but also fraudulent in

your

···

claims of interest in the welfare of other video poker players as
revealed by your very words quoted above.

Brian --- A60sMan

#17

Really nothing left for me to respond to. Not a single reader seems to be in
danger of succumbing to your con. I've caught you in dozens of lies, all
documented here. I've proved you're a fraud and a welsher. Go ahead and make
one last pathetic name-calling post in your Pavlovian stupor.

Cogno