--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@c...>
wrote:
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>
wrote:
> Hmmm. I just said I don't care to contact them. All I want is you
to verify they exist. If you can't provide this simplest task then
there is ABSOLUTELY no doubt they do not exist, and, you lied about
them and everything else.
So now, when faced with evidence of who they are, where they are,
and
how I used to contact them,
You have provided nothing but a bunch of BS. Sorry, monkey boy, but
you idiotic assertions just don't cut it. Come up with some real
evidence or admit you lied. In fact, maybe you'd like to turn this
into a bet. How about it? If you can prove they exist then you win
the bet. If you choose not to bet then it's proof positive you are a
liar. Will the real coward show up again? $10,000. I'll make it small
so you can afford it.
> > A corny statement like that isn't going to help your cause. Now
> > you're saying you don't want it to be that they did what I said,
>
> Nope. I just said all I want is for you to prove they exist.
Simple
> as can be. We all know they don't exist, but I will keep pushing
you until you admit it for all to see.
Too bad I'll outlive you since I'm in far better health and don't
spend hours every day inhaling smoke inside casinos.
Until your liver gives out from all that drinking.
You've got your
proof, so now it's up to you to turn the other cheek or act like a
man. i wonder what route little dicky will take.....
No, you've given nothing but made up names. Are you up for the bet?
This is where the men are separated from the liars.
>
> A lot of words. Absolutely no content. If you'd take just 1
minute
> and admit you lied about the mathematicians then you wouldn't
have
to look so silly.
Trying to move inquiring eyes away from your gambling problem
again,
are we??? My enjoyment factor just went up three-fold!
Nope. Just proving you are a liar. Are you up for the bet?
>
> More words, still no content. Admit you lied, monkey boy, it will
be
> much easier than continuing to look like a complete moron.
Looks like I won that one too.
Looks like you lost. Either accept the bet or run back crying to your
mama.
> You know absolutely nothing about me. You go through this same
> diatribe with EVERYONE who challenges you. You can't even come up
> with anything remotely new or clever. This is just another
example
of
> your iditiotic mental state that tries to generalize everyone
into
> one fixed description. It really makes YOU look like a fool.
I see it's getting to you again.......
LMAO. Come on monkey boy, you can do better then that. I really
nailed you on that one, didn't I?
> More monkey boy BS. If this was true you'd have snatched up
Cogno's
> challenge about future results. You can't claim future success
and
> then put your tail between your legs and run away from absolute
> proof.
Future results?? Ha! Guaranteed as I said. Ask him privately what
my
publisher wrote back to him, and not for public disemmination.
Nice try. If this is not another lie, YOU tell us what your publisher
said. Of course, you won't come back with anything verifiable and
you're such a chicken you'll never take my bet. Most likely, you'll
try to change it to something else to avoid the obvious fact you
can't prove these math guys exist.
> That's why you are a complete idiot. You might as well be saying
the
> earth is flat, my strategy makes it so. Or, the sun rises in the
west
> because of my strategy. Or, your mythical math guys really exist.
> They are all equally valid statements.
La-dee-da-dee-la......... Have you no originality in that disease-
infested brain of yours?
Nailed another one. This is really tooooooo easy.
> No, you see when you want to prove an assertion, all it takes is
ONE
> example where your assertion fails and your assertion is invalid.
> That's the trouble with assertions, they are hard to prove valid
and easy to prove invalid.
Read on.....
>
> > Here's an example from my 2002 audit report: On March 6th I
> withdrew
> > $17,200 cash from my bank in Az., and I drove overnight to LV.
At
> > Bellagio I did a pre-check in, sat down and started playing $1
BP
> at
> > the Baccarat Bar, 2nd machine from the end/left, and hit the
> > progressive Royal for $5489 within 4 minutes. Profit = $5464. I
> > immediately checked out (it's March 7th early am), stopped at
the
> Nv.
> > branch of my bank and re-deposited $22,664 and then drive home.
My
> > $40 tip is recorded as an expense on my Schedule C, right
alongside
> > the rental car, gasoline, and tuna sub I bought at Subway at
Pilot
> in
> > Kingman on the way home. You'd review my bank statements on-
line
or
> > in-person with me at my bank--your choice. My W2G for $5489 is
> dated
> > 3/7/2002.
>
> All of this PROVEs nothing. These are simply ASSERTIONs on your
part.
> W2Gs are meaningless because EVERYONE knows that they are only
part
> of the story. They only account for winnings and not the losing
that
> occurs between them. I had many W2Gs last year and I certainly
did
> not win the full amount they total up to. For all we know you you
> lost $5000 getting it, or after you got it you lost $10000 in
some
AZ
> indian casino. Can you prove otherwise???
So what you're manufacturing up is that I withdrew the money, went
to
the casino, won and received a W2G---but I LOST it all and sold
drugs
to make up for it in order that my total deposit included what I
said
I won!!!!...& I have done this 250 times without ever getting
caught?
Yikes--you're a funny guy.
No, it's so much easier than that. It would be extremely easy to take
illegal funds and increase the win for any session or reduce the
loss. All you need to do is take along some illegal cash on every
trip and supplement your results. Actually, it a pretty good money
laundering system. All the money appears to have been won and you pay
taxes like any other taxpayer so the money is now clean.
If you figured this out for yourself then maybe I should give you
more credit then I have been.
> > My casino contemporaneous records are noted in detail.
> Since we already know you are a pathological liar, who would ever
> believe your casino records? Maybe you could sell them to Disney,
> they're always looking for new fairy tales.
Since the IRS audit report corresponds directly to my casino
records
as well as the withdraw & re-deposit records at my bank--and they
found zero faults in record-keeping--it kind of look like the
fishing
expedition you're on is in a sinking boat.
I said it all above. All you need to do is supplement on every trip
and nobody would be the wiser. Of course you'd document it as a win
in your records. You'd be fool to leave out this detail.
> > Following it so far?
> Completely. When are you going to come up with ANYTHING provable?
So if you don't believe anything I've said and you feel the IRS
audit
report is inaccurate as well as my being a drug dealer & money-
laundering guru, then you'd logically take on the wager because in
your mind THERE'S NO WAY YOU COULD LOSE! I think you're looking a
bit
stupid here.
Really, there is no way I could lose as long as the bet specified
PROOF.
PS. This is a mathematical term, not a legal term. In our legal
system someone is "found" guilty or not guilty. Guilt is never
proved. Like I said, the only way for you to PROVE my scenario is
invalid is to account for every single moment of your existence.
>
> > So where would the possibility of any of that
> > stuff about illegal monies you mentioned fit in?
> You mention one day out of 365 and you want us to believe that
> eliminates the possiblity of illegal activities? You've got to be
> kidding. You are the stupidest bozo I've ever seen.
Huh? What?? 1 day out of what? It's 250 trips out of 8 years.
Yeah, one day. that's all you mentioned. Did you think we'd all
believe your results from every other trip when you're already a
proven liar?
I also
must be the slickest criminal in the history of crime to be able to
pull it off for this long before finally getting bagged by Dicky
The
Private Dick!
As long as you don't get caught in your illegal activities, the rest
of it is quite easy.
> You better be careful here. If the requirement to the arbitrator
was that there was ABSOLUTELY no other possible explanation, then
you
> would lose. Once again, if you want to call it proof then that
would be the grounds for arbitration. You'd have to account for
every
> single minute of your life to PROVE you didn't get money from
illegal drugs or blackmail or any other numerous crimes. We alrady
know you are a scammer, it's not a big stretch to believe you are
involved in other illegal activities. In fact, your VP scam is the
perfect way to launder the illegal monies. I think I'm on to
something.
Then again, go ahead and take the wager and find out if an
arbitrator
would think as you do! It's that simple!!
It has nothing to do with "think" it would have to be proof. I'd have
no problem finding someone who understands this simple concept. But,
first let's get back to those math guys. Are you going to take my bet?
But now it's your turn to
be careful. An arbitrator looks at "reasonable & proper" as a basis
for his or her decision,
Not if the bet requires absolute PROOF. You see that's YOUR problem
if you cannot provide it. And, I'd only take the bet if you have to
PROVE it. Anyone can falsify records. Look at Enron for example.
> The difference now is your talking with someone who already knows
you are a liar and a fraud. I would want absolute proof which you
cannot provide.
I'm talking to a cowardly shell of a man afraid to make a bet or
take
a challenge,
I issued you a challenge. How about it? 10Gs for you to come up with
your math guys and their proof.
> > figured out how to tap into those positive events,
>
> More snake oil. This is equivalent to saying you are psychic. If
you are, then that changes the definition I gave above. The game
would no longer be RANDOM. Are you claiming psychic abilities?
I'll be whatever you want me to be, Dicky.
Have another drink.
> > Answer--YES, he would gladly be doing it for free. You see, he
> makes money playing his own version of my strategy which i took
the
time to teach him in 2000, but unlike you, he only plays twice a
year
> because he's not a sorry addict.
>
> Lie. That's no what you said last year.
You never asked if he maintains the site for free. You asked if the
profits he gets are considered payment from me for his work. Clear
your head for a minute and make believe you're not an addict. Now
do
you see it???
That's still payment. As long as he is accepting the monies (small as
they are) for work, that constitutes payment and, as such, means you
have profited from your books. QED.
Oh, and that makes you a liar, again.
> > So why doesn't he fear you as he would any advantage BJ player
who works with a 1% edge at best--and we know they all get tossed
> > immediately when spotted?
>
> Because they don't have any system in place to detect advantage
> players ... yet.
Am i talking to God's gift to the gaming world or WHAT!? I never
knew
there was such an expert out there! Too bad when he talks
about 'advantage players' all he does is look like a fool.
I guess this means you have no rebuttal. That must mean you agree
with my statement.
Here's a hint: Dollar players are not considered players who 'pull
out' large amounts of money. Ask the bozos who played the ones i
had
installed at Wynn.
I didn't know you worked at Wynns. Were the machines heavy?
The game took an average of just under 2% from
these so-called 'expert advantage players' on dollar FPDW.
Could this be another lie? Let's look at it financially. The machines
were being played by pros at 800 hands/hr and $5 a hand. So, that's
2% of $4000, or $80/hour the machines were bringing into the casino.
Now, they replace them (in less than a week) with machines paying
back about 1% less and they have lost 90% of the players. This would
mean the machines are now bringing in about $12 an hour. Yeah, right.
> > More inconsistencies. You've seen time and again on vpFREE and
> > elsewhere how the mysterious "hundreds of vp pros lurking the
> streets
> > of LV" are always being banned, barred, and maybe even boobed
for
> > their winning prowess.
>
> Then I guess you're now admitting they are successful and
advantage
> play works. Otherwise why would they be banned?
See the word 'mysterious'? That means they don't exist. they only
exist in the minds of addicted vp players because they need a way
to
make themselves feel OK about the large amounts of money they
constantly lose. It gives them false hope for the future, when in
fact the only way they really do have any hope is if they come to
me
for help. And they do that--by the truckload.
> You can't have it both ways. Either they are banned and advantage
> play is successful or they are not banned and your entire
argument
is
> worthless. Which way is it? You really should ask yourself why
your
> mind contradicts itself in the middle of single paragraph?
Read above and weep.
LMAO. Did you really think that BS corrected your previous mistake?
Really, really LMAO.
> > But you believe it. So please tell
> > us how it can be that the casinos don't care a hoot about the
> > individual's results again?
>
> Because they can't tell the difference between someone who has
had
a
> lucky run and will eventually give it all back and an advantage
> player. Someday this will change and they will be able to compute
the expected return for each player. Don't worry, you won't be
banned.
What a theory! Too bad it's just that, because i know you have an
urgent need to build your own self confidence as a way to justify
playing far more than you should.
It has nothing to do with theory. Just like the blackjack monitoring
systems of today are not theories. It's called technology. I know
that's a subject you'd rather avoid. Would you like me to spell out
exactly how it would be implemented? Oh wait, you'd be lost the
moment I said something complicated, like .... addition.