vpFREE2 Forums

Refreshing information

#241

> Now how do you know that? How do you know if there's ANY so-

called advantage players ANYWHERE?

Because I have a bad habit of watching those around me play. I also
tend to move around a lot. I've also played VP in at least 20
separate and distinct geographical areas. Finally, I know how to
correctly play many different games.

That's more BS. If you watched me play you'd believe I was one of you
optimal play fools. And besides, if you really did watch other people
play, the first thing you'd likely see after your first blink is a
fist coming your way. Saying you watch in order to manufacture some
sort of answer here is one thing, but actually doing so is another.
Most players lose, and if any of them catch someone watching while
they are, you'd look away FAST.

> You and your theories are so loose for a
> computer geek. And here's a clue: I tend to believe there's at
least
> SOME of your animal in LV,

That's exactly what I said. Your point?

Some, not the hundreds you believe there are. And most of them are
losers--except for the ones that experience very good luck.

Did I say vacation? Don't think so. How does one take a vacation

from retirement?

No I did, and you know what I mean. Even though you don't say it you
do. I imagine a vacation is anything away from home that's
interesting to the vacationers--at least if you live in America.

I really don't care if you were fired or not. However, I'll stick
with it as a VERY likely supposition. It seems to me if you hadn't
been fired you'd still have that high paying job you like to brag
about.

So how does this 'supposition' position fit in with all your other
balls-on requirements? I made the same weekly salary when I started
playing my strategy full-time. Tell me, if you had the choice of
being out of the country 80% of the time making a big salary, or
being able to be home with your family 80% of the time making about
the same amount, which would you choose?

Me thinks you've blown a gasket over this one. My usage is exactly
what I meant to say. In my usage the adverb "less" refers to the
verb "care". You need absolutely no help in making a complete idiot
out of yourself.

Did you go to the Queen's school of grammar or what? You might be
able to twist words around with some bunch of video poker losers you
meet up with from time to time, but not with me. If you don't
understand, I'm not being paid to teach you.

I don't need to. Reid's proof covers ALL progressive strategies

with uneven payoffs.

Reid who?

> There is one and only one way to win: with good luck. No skill

beyond basic common sense ever has nor ever will help anyone win
anything.

This is the RS lie. It is simply not true.

And that's simply because you haven't the ability to figure it out,
and it's being blocked by your make-believe theory.

Remember that typist with 99.75% accuracy? Humans really can achieve
low errors rates when they want to and nothing you can belch out will
ever change that.

Remember what I said about fatigue after 1 hour or even less? Run
that thru your theory book and watch your cork pop.

The yellow bellied slimeball, little Robbie, is at it again. Makes

an offer and now reneges on it. You are simply pathethic. Now, let's

hear your MODIFIED offer. And, please keep your panties on this

time.

Do it my way or your fired. Pure & simple. Cry all you want about it,
but it's my bet and I make the rules.

  
It was YOUR choice, slimeball. I'll meet you anywhere in LV.

Now you say that, butthead. Somehow I can't quite picture you in a
decent place.

> Again, When you're ready to agree to my basic terms, i'll give

you the amount. And if you keep in mind that computer geeks are so
far below me when you try to agree, we might get somewhere.

···

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

#242

That is very true Rob. I was kinda shocked on saturday at how much
"optimal" holds you actually do use. I expected that
your holds would have been a bit more agressive given
your results. Especially with the 3 card flushes and SF, things
like that.

-Tom

That's more BS. If you watched me play you'd believe I was one of

you

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

optimal play fools.

#243

No, I criticize YOU, Mr. Coward, for being a liar and promoting a
fraudulent system in order to satisfy your enormous ego.

I have to admit, my ego gets a TREMENDOUS boost every time you post,
as it nearly all seems to be the product of a menstral-mouth.

Of course they don't ... How about specifications that don't

provide adequate support for the actual stress levels.

Corrected at the sub far before any formal testing is commenced by
the prime.

> They're either proven met or they're not incorporated.

Unless something is missed during testing and simulation.

Then it's not a fault of the spec, so what's your point?

> Did you ever hear of Quality Control???

Yes, and it doesn't catch everything. Must you continue making a

fool out of yourself.

Um, it had better, or else aircraft like the F-22A would never make
it outside the doors at Lockheed-Marietta. And guess what--Nellis
took delivery of 2 just after Langley did 2 monts ago.

> Must be as far-
> fetched a concept to you as Human Factors Engineering is.

I've worked closely with Human Factors many times. Your point?

Other than the one on top of your head.

Must have been looooong ago, cause you sure don't portray any
intelligent knowledge of it.

No, it was a question. That's why I used "what". So, what's the
answer?

5 years. Now why would you believe that when you only believe what
you and a handful of cooky theorists say.

It's an IGT game. How many times do I need to tell you. Are you

getting drunk again already?

Yup. Injun Gonna Tinker.

And, just to make it clear, the game, One Eyed Jacks, existed

before any Indian casino was ever opened in MN (or probably anywhere).

Gee that's clear.

Because you have a patent on blabbing nonsense and I wouldn't want

to infringe on it.

Sounds like a ramble from Quadzilla--you know, the 'expert' who went
broke several times with your theories.

> Huh? If good weather FINALLY comes your way up in Minnesota, just
> maybe you could go on that picnic for a change. That's
called 'taking advantage of the good fortune that comes your way'.

You just indicated the "luck", good weather, came before
the "result", taking a picnic. Do you have any clue whatsoever?

Bozo, the 'result' is the win taken because of the good luck. You
idiots would play right on through it every time. and we all know
overwhelmingly, that's a stupid thing to do.

That your alcohol wasted brain can understand ...

I happen to be sipping on a snifter of Jose Cuervo Reserva de la
Familia right now---something you couldn't afford even if they had it
in Minnesota. But you know, you might--if you stayed away from the
Indian joint the next 2 days.

Most typists (remember typing pools) typed all day. Their error

rates were very low. It turned out, the more they typed, the more
accurate they got. It's called practice and that's why they had pools.

How dumb are you? I know, I've asked that several times and you don't
have enough upstairs to be able to answer that. Why do you think they
invented word processors? Because too many typing mistakes were being
made continuously. And fatigue wears everyone out--esp. in a stinky
casino. I know you'll hate this, but provide proof on your "typing
pool" (that's not part of an Olympic event, is it?) baloney or
apologize.

To anyone with a business background it's perfectly clear. So, Mr.
MBS fails to understand even the simplest business statement yet
again.

One of the biggest mistakes any computer geek can make in corporate
America is makeing believe they know business. the only thing they
understand is theory, and because that's so dangerous, they never
climb the success ladder.

No, the bet was whether I'd show up. Nothing more, nothing less.

So, are we back on?

Yeah, when and where I tell you. Until then, you are terrified of
meeting me. Imagine how small you'll feel--even though you're kind of
big.

You just stated "Casinos put in" and "the suits demand more".

Aren't these synonomous in this context? And, please, you have no
clue about economics.

I guess we'll go back to high school economics this time, pea-brain.
They are so far apart synonomously that you make me laugh.
If you could possibly understand business profits, you'd see that
when the suits demand a higher floor take, the casino can either
lower paytables or cut expenses. Did bozo get it this time?

Who said I don't go to LV.

You make up so much stuff, I submit you don't really know what you do.

> New terms? $300,000 cash at 10,000:1. I'll hold the money at my
home
> (it's safe here, unlike in Minnesota)--all cash. We on? No

whining.

Sure, you want me to send you $30.

You are a true Bozo. $300,000 is from YOU. And the deposit rests with
ME. You're sooooo thick it's hilarios! But then, Hubert Humphrey
wasn't too bright either.

···

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

#244

Why this is one nice guy, isn't he though? No sass, no ignorance, no
embarrassing self-incrimination, and only a small dose of how he
lifts words off of my site and then feeds them to Ed. He believes
skill is 90% of the game, so he tells Ed "Good luck." In other
words, "May you suceed 10% of the time." This guy will parrot
anything. Here's one he missed: Good Skill!
--------------------------------------------------------------------

As I've said several times, luck is the determining factor in the
short term and skill is the determining factor in the long term.

Now explain that malarky. If someone plays 50,000 hands, it depends
on luck if the player wins or not. BUT, if they play those 50,000
hands a thousand more times, after that then those clumps of 50,000
hands have results that are somehow linked to a skill that wasn't
there in the early-on bunch of 50,000 hands??? Now do you see how
much of a jerk you look like?

Is

that simple concept too much for your neuron-challenged brain? And,
please, the day I even visit, let alone copy ANYTHING off your
fradulent website, will be a cold day in hell.

As I said, you're day starts with a visit to my site, and it never
ends. The words you posted were diretly taken from one of my
strategies.

Finally, "good skill" is the result of diligent practice. It is not
something that can be wished for.

You mean Dilbert's practice, don't you? You know, that guy you
dressed up in a suit.

PS. Just how often do you respond to your own posts?

???

···

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

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

#245

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

wrote:

> > Now how do you know that? How do you know if there's ANY so-
called advantage players ANYWHERE?
>
> Because I have a bad habit of watching those around me play. I

also

> tend to move around a lot. I've also played VP in at least 20
> separate and distinct geographical areas. Finally, I know how to
> correctly play many different games.

That's more BS. If you watched me play you'd believe I was one of

you

optimal play fools.

No, I'd believe you were just an optimal fool.

And besides, if you really did watch other people
play, the first thing you'd likely see after your first blink is a
fist coming your way. Saying you watch in order to manufacture some
sort of answer here is one thing, but actually doing so is another.

Are you crazy. If you're sitting next to someone they don't even know
you're watching them. Most are fixated on the screen in front of
them. I certainly don't care if someone watches me. Only a paranoid
fool would care.

Most players lose, and if any of them catch someone watching while
they are, you'd look away FAST.

Not me. This has to rate up there with the most stupid things you've
belched out all month.

>
> > You and your theories are so loose for a
> > computer geek. And here's a clue: I tend to believe there's at
> least
> > SOME of your animal in LV,
>
> That's exactly what I said. Your point?

Some, not the hundreds you believe there are. And most of them are
losers

Sure they are, now back to your yellow brick road ...

--except for the ones that experience very good luck.

Did the "wonderful wizard" tell you that too ...

>
> Did I say vacation? Don't think so. How does one take a vacation
from retirement?

No I did, and you know what I mean. Even though you don't say it

you

do. I imagine a vacation is anything away from home that's
interesting to the vacationers--at least if you live in America.

Then that's what you should say. However, if I need to be more
specific I don't stop at casinos every time I'm away from home. So,
once more you're wrong.

>
> I really don't care if you were fired or not. However, I'll stick
> with it as a VERY likely supposition. It seems to me if you

hadn't

> been fired you'd still have that high paying job you like to brag
> about.

So how does this 'supposition' position fit in with all your other
balls-on requirements? I made the same weekly salary when I started
playing my strategy full-time. Tell me, if you had the choice of
being out of the country 80% of the time making a big salary, or
being able to be home with your family 80% of the time making about
the same amount, which would you choose?

You don't have much choice when they fire your butt.

>
> Me thinks you've blown a gasket over this one. My usage is

exactly

> what I meant to say. In my usage the adverb "less" refers to the
> verb "care". You need absolutely no help in making a complete

idiot

> out of yourself.

Did you go to the Queen's school of grammar or what? You might be
able to twist words around with some bunch of video poker losers

you

meet up with from time to time, but not with me. If you don't
understand, I'm not being paid to teach you.

In other words, you were wrong again.

>
> I don't need to. Reid's proof covers ALL progressive strategies
with uneven payoffs.

Reid who?

Waffle, waffle.

>
> > There is one and only one way to win: with good luck. No skill
beyond basic common sense ever has nor ever will help anyone win
anything.
>
> This is the RS lie. It is simply not true.

And that's simply because you haven't the ability to figure it out,
and it's being blocked by your make-believe theory.

I have it figured perfectly. You deny it in order to perpetrate your
worthless scam on others.

Remember that typist with 99.75% accuracy? Humans really can

achieve

low errors rates when they want to and nothing you can belch out

will

ever change that.

Remember what I said about fatigue after 1 hour or even less? Run
that thru your theory book and watch your cork pop.

I already answered that, bozo. You are such a fool you keep trying to
use responses that I've already shown to be fallacious.

>
> The yellow bellied slimeball, little Robbie, is at it again.

Makes

an offer and now reneges on it. You are simply pathethic. Now,

let's

> hear your MODIFIED offer. And, please keep your panties on this
time.

Do it my way or your fired. Pure & simple. Cry all you want about

it,

but it's my bet and I make the rules.

You ALREADY made the bet and now you're reneging. You have now lost
any possible credibility that anyone could ever have given you.
Simple and oh so sweet.

>
> It was YOUR choice, slimeball. I'll meet you anywhere in LV.

Now you say that, butthead. Somehow I can't quite picture you in a
decent place.

I've always said it. Come on, show us you have something between your
legs besides your head and stick with your original bet. But then,
that would mean your word actually meant something ...

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

#246

> That's more BS. If you watched me play you'd believe I was one of
you optimal play fools.

No, I'd believe you were just an optimal fool.

Come to think of it, if you're the video poker brute you pretend to
be and do go to all those ridiculous Indian casinos to play
and "watch others play" who's watching you???

> And besides, if you really did watch other people
> play, the first thing you'd likely see after your first blink is

a

> fist coming your way. Saying you watch in order to manufacture

some

> sort of answer here is one thing, but actually doing so is

another.

Are you crazy. If you're sitting next to someone they don't even

know you're watching them. Most are fixated on the screen in front of

them. I certainly don't care if someone watches me. Only a paranoid
fool would care.

And you call yourself a seasoned casino-goer? Maybe you don't have
the aptitude to know whether someone is watching you or not. Not
surprising. The more you write the more you appear to be the armchair
instigator I'm believing you really are. It may well be that you are
so jealous of both me and the gurus for my success at the game and
their ability to pull the wool over other player's eyes thru the use
of the math, that you have become increasingly infuriated with us
all. You say the dumbest things, and there continues to be no way out
for a hack like you.

> Most players lose, and if any of them catch someone watching

while they are, you'd look away FAST.

Not me. This has to rate up there with the most stupid things

you've belched out all month.

Me me me me. You are nothing more than make believe every time you
whine. What'd you do--have a tough day at the Injun joint as they
laughed at you some more for playing their stupir oej game again?

> Some, not the hundreds you believe there are. And most of them

are losers

Sure they are, now back to your yellow brick road ...

So you agree that most of them are losers. Even if you didn't mean to
say that, it's obvious that's what you believe.

Then that's what you should say. However, if I need to be more
specific I don't stop at casinos every time I'm away from home. So,
once more you're wrong.

You go to casinos and build every trip around them. That's what
losers do, and you are such a loser. Anyone who runs around the
country after scraping together a few bucks just to play at Indian
casinos while taking a few side trips to other gaming locations has a
big problem. That's why I'm here--to tell you about it because you'll
never admit to such a compulsion.

> So how does this 'supposition' position fit in with all your

other

> balls-on requirements? I made the same weekly salary when I

started

> playing my strategy full-time. Tell me, if you had the choice of
> being out of the country 80% of the time making a big salary, or
> being able to be home with your family 80% of the time making

about

> the same amount, which would you choose?

You don't have much choice when they fire your butt.

Answer the question. All you do when you say something stupid like
that is solidify your hypocracy of requiring everything to be proven.

> Reid who?

Waffle, waffle.

Don't forget the real maple syrup, because geeks like to sugar-coat
what they say when they have to rely on other people's theories
because they can't figure something out on their own.

> Do it my way or your fired. Pure & simple. Cry all you want about
it,
> but it's my bet and I make the rules.

You ALREADY made the bet and now you're reneging. You have now lost
any possible credibility that anyone could ever have given you.
Simple and oh so sweet.

Do it my way or wimp away from it. You have a choice. Be the fat man
and accept it or go on a diest!(Now THAT would be a killer!!). >

> >
I've always said it. Come on, show us you have something between

your legs besides your head and stick with your original bet. But
then, that would mean your word actually meant something ...

I make the rules here, Ricky. You've worked for better people than
you all your life, and now in your declining years it's time to
relive that experience. I'll even sign an autograph for you.

···

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

#247

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

wrote:

> No, I criticize YOU, Mr. Coward, for being a liar and promoting a
> fraudulent system in order to satisfy your enormous ego.

I have to admit, my ego gets a TREMENDOUS boost every time you

post,

as it nearly all seems to be the product of a menstral-mouth.

Another example of your intellectual capability. And, I see you
didn't refute my claim. I guess you've accepted being a yellow coward.

>
> Of course they don't ... How about specifications that don't
provide adequate support for the actual stress levels.

Corrected at the sub far before any formal testing is commenced by
the prime.

I meant tolerances that don't quite work under unexpected stresses?
But I expect you knew this and are just trying to worm your way out.

>
> > They're either proven met or they're not incorporated.
>
> Unless something is missed during testing and simulation.

Then it's not a fault of the spec, so what's your point?

Yes it is the fault of the spec, that is my point, and saying
otherwise is a cop out.

>
> > Did you ever hear of Quality Control???
>
> Yes, and it doesn't catch everything. Must you continue making a
fool out of yourself.

Um, it had better, or else aircraft like the F-22A would never make
it outside the doors at Lockheed-Marietta. And guess what--Nellis
took delivery of 2 just after Langley did 2 monts ago.

So, you're saying airplanes NEVER fail? Do you know how stupid you
look now.

>
> > Must be as far-
> > fetched a concept to you as Human Factors Engineering is.
>
> I've worked closely with Human Factors many times. Your point?
Other than the one on top of your head.

Must have been looooong ago, cause you sure don't portray any
intelligent knowledge of it.

I'm doing just fine, you keep digging yourself in deeper.

>
> No, it was a question. That's why I used "what". So, what's the
> answer?

5 years. Now why would you believe that when you only believe what
you and a handful of cooky theorists say.

It sounds fishy since you indicated you were an addict back in the
early 90s.

>
> And, just to make it clear, the game, One Eyed Jacks, existed
before any Indian casino was ever opened in MN (or probably

anywhere).

Gee that's clear.

You actually understood something? You should make an entry in your
diary right now.

>
> Because you have a patent on blabbing nonsense and I wouldn't

want

to infringe on it.

Sounds like a ramble from Quadzilla--you know, the 'expert' who

went

broke several times with your theories.

One more blabbing example from Robbie, the Princess of Cowards.

>
> > Huh? If good weather FINALLY comes your way up in Minnesota,

just

> > maybe you could go on that picnic for a change. That's
> called 'taking advantage of the good fortune that comes your

way'.

>
> You just indicated the "luck", good weather, came before
> the "result", taking a picnic. Do you have any clue whatsoever?

Bozo, the 'result' is the win taken because of the good luck. You
idiots would play right on through it every time. and we all know
overwhelmingly, that's a stupid thing to do.

Everyone always "takes" the luck when it comes their way. Could you
possibly say something even MORE stupid?

>
> That your alcohol wasted brain can understand ...

I happen to be sipping on a snifter of Jose Cuervo Reserva de la
Familia right now---something you couldn't afford even if they had

it

in Minnesota.

I would never touch Joses' Familia, but it doesn't suprise me that
you would.

>
> Most typists (remember typing pools) typed all day. Their error
rates were very low. It turned out, the more they typed, the more
accurate they got. It's called practice and that's why they had

pools.

How dumb are you? I know, I've asked that several times and you

don't

have enough upstairs to be able to answer that. Why do you think

they

invented word processors? Because too many typing mistakes were

being

made continuously.

No, they invented word processors because they were a more efficient
solution. No middle man (or lady) required. This is the third example
of your complete lack of business sense in the last two days, Mr. MBS.

>
> You just stated "Casinos put in" and "the suits demand more".
Aren't these synonomous in this context? And, please, you have no
clue about economics.

I guess we'll go back to high school economics this time, pea-

brain.

They are so far apart synonomously that you make me laugh.
If you could possibly understand business profits, you'd see that
when the suits demand a higher floor take, the casino can either
lower paytables or cut expenses. Did bozo get it this time?

I see, by "the casino", you must mean the janitor takes over and
orders new machines without the approval of management. ROTFLMAO.

>
> Who said I don't go to LV.

You make up so much stuff, I submit you don't really know what you

do.

I see, in other words, the Princess or Cowards is backing down again.

> > New terms? $300,000 cash at 10,000:1. I'll hold the money at my
> home
> > (it's safe here, unlike in Minnesota)--all cash. We on? No
whining.
>
> Sure, you want me to send you $30.

You are a true Bozo. $300,000 is from YOU. And the deposit rests

with

ME. You're sooooo thick it's hilarios! But then, Hubert Humphrey
wasn't too bright either.

You want me to send you $300,000? Did Jose flail on you a bit too
much? Of course, I understand exactly what you're doing. You're
reneging on your first bet like the yellow coward we all know. And,
you think making a ridiculous offer like this will somehow change
something. Sorry Princess, it won't work. You offered 10000:1 odds,
either put up or shut up.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

#248

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

wrote:

> Why this is one nice guy, isn't he though? No sass, no ignorance,

no

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

> --- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:
> embarrassing self-incrimination, and only a small dose of how he
> lifts words off of my site and then feeds them to Ed. He believes
> skill is 90% of the game, so he tells Ed "Good luck." In other
> words, "May you suceed 10% of the time." This guy will parrot
> anything. Here's one he missed: Good Skill!
> ------------------------------------------------------------------

--

>
> As I've said several times, luck is the determining factor in the
> short term and skill is the determining factor in the long term.

Now explain that malarky. If someone plays 50,000 hands, it depends
on luck if the player wins or not. BUT, if they play those 50,000
hands a thousand more times, after that then those clumps of 50,000
hands have results that are somehow linked to a skill that wasn't
there in the early-on bunch of 50,000 hands??? Now do you see how
much of a jerk you look like?

No, I see what an idiot you are. All of the results from your
thousand 50,000 hand examples will be DIFFERENT. Some will be wins
(could even be the first several) and others will be losses. That's
where the luck comes into play. After the 50,000,000 hands (actually
much fewer) the results average out and the luck factor is
overwhelmed by the influence of consistently playing skillfully. I
realize these FACTs are way above your intellect and I don't expect a
reasonable reply from you even though this is just the application of
statistics 101.

Is
> that simple concept too much for your neuron-challenged brain?

And,

> please, the day I even visit, let alone copy ANYTHING off your
> fradulent website, will be a cold day in hell.

As I said, you're day starts with a visit to my site, and it never
ends. The words you posted were diretly taken from one of my
strategies.

Sure they were, Princess ... How many more lies do you have in you?

>
> Finally, "good skill" is the result of diligent practice. It is

not

> something that can be wished for.

You mean Dilbert's practice, don't you? You know, that guy you
dressed up in a suit.

You don't have the slightest clue, do you? And I'm beginning to think
Dilberts' manager is MUCH smarter than you are.

#249

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

wrote:

> > That's more BS. If you watched me play you'd believe I was one

of

> you optimal play fools.
>
> No, I'd believe you were just an optimal fool.

Come to think of it, if you're the video poker brute you pretend to
be and do go to all those ridiculous Indian casinos to play
and "watch others play" who's watching you???

Like I said, I don't care.

>
> > And besides, if you really did watch other people
> > play, the first thing you'd likely see after your first blink

is

a
> > fist coming your way. Saying you watch in order to manufacture
some
> > sort of answer here is one thing, but actually doing so is
another.
>
> Are you crazy. If you're sitting next to someone they don't even
know you're watching them. Most are fixated on the screen in front

of

> them. I certainly don't care if someone watches me. Only a

paranoid

> fool would care.

And you call yourself a seasoned casino-goer? Maybe you don't have
the aptitude to know whether someone is watching you or not.

Like I said, I don't care.

Not
surprising. The more you write the more you appear to be the

armchair

instigator I'm believing you really are. It may well be that you

are

so jealous of both me and the gurus for my success at the game and
their ability to pull the wool over other player's eyes thru the

use

of the math, that you have become increasingly infuriated with us
all. You say the dumbest things, and there continues to be no way

out

for a hack like you.

I love it when you have nothing intelligent to respond with, and yet
you respond anyway and look stupid doing it. Your last tirade had
nothing to do with the original question.

>
> > Most players lose, and if any of them catch someone watching
while they are, you'd look away FAST.
>
> Not me. This has to rate up there with the most stupid things
you've belched out all month.

Me me me me. You are nothing more than make believe every time you
whine. What'd you do--have a tough day at the Injun joint as they
laughed at you some more for playing their stupir oej game again?

See, you did it again.

>
> > Some, not the hundreds you believe there are. And most of them
are losers
>
> Sure they are, now back to your yellow brick road ...

So you agree that most of them are losers. Even if you didn't mean

to

say that, it's obvious that's what you believe.

I think everyone knows exactly what I meant.

>
> Then that's what you should say. However, if I need to be more
> specific I don't stop at casinos every time I'm away from home.

So,

> once more you're wrong.

You go to casinos and build every trip around them.

Wrong again, Princess.

That's what
losers do, and you are such a loser. Anyone who runs around the
country after scraping together a few bucks just to play at Indian
casinos while taking a few side trips to other gaming locations has

a

big problem. That's why I'm here--to tell you about it because

you'll

never admit to such a compulsion.

Like I said, wrong again, Princess. But I tell you what. I'll tell
exactly what I do around the country as soon as you spit out your
real name. What's that, little Robbie just had another accident in
her panties.

>
> > So how does this 'supposition' position fit in with all your
other
> > balls-on requirements? I made the same weekly salary when I
started
> > playing my strategy full-time. Tell me, if you had the choice

of

> > being out of the country 80% of the time making a big salary,

or

> > being able to be home with your family 80% of the time making
about
> > the same amount, which would you choose?
>
> You don't have much choice when they fire your butt.

Answer the question. All you do when you say something stupid like
that is solidify your hypocracy of requiring everything to be

proven.

I don't deal with you fantasies, Princess.

>
> > Reid who?
>
> Waffle, waffle.

Don't forget the real maple syrup, because geeks like to sugar-coat
what they say when they have to rely on other people's theories
because they can't figure something out on their own.

Waffle, waffle.

>
> > Do it my way or your fired. Pure & simple. Cry all you want

about

> it,
> > but it's my bet and I make the rules.
>
> You ALREADY made the bet and now you're reneging. You have now

lost

> any possible credibility that anyone could ever have given you.
> Simple and oh so sweet.

Do it my way or wimp away from it. You have a choice. Be the fat

man

and accept it or go on a diest!(Now THAT would be a killer!!). >

I ALREADY accepted once and now you're reneging. Why would I ever
accept a second time? You've alrady proven you'll just renege again,
Princess.

> > >
> I've always said it. Come on, show us you have something between
your legs besides your head and stick with your original bet. But
then, that would mean your word actually meant something ...

I make the rules here, Ricky.

In your dreams, Princess.

You've worked for better people than
you all your life, and now in your declining years it's time to
relive that experience. I'll even sign an autograph for you.

Renege, renege ... You're so pathetic. What about your original
offer? Wasn't that one of YOUR rules, Princess? It sure was YOUR
post. Once again, little Robbie, put up or SHUT up.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

#250

> I have to admit, my ego gets a TREMENDOUS boost every time you
post, as it nearly all seems to be the product of a menstral-mouth.

Another example of your intellectual capability. And, I see you
didn't refute my claim. I guess you've accepted being a yellow

coward.

Your claims are of no value, and are that of a disgruntled old man
looking for entertainment in his declining years.

And did I mention that I thoroughly enjoy watching you wake up a fool
every morning by heading directly to your computer to read the
insults I fling your way? You're like a whiny whipping post, where
you ask for it, then complain about it, and then ask for more. It's a
blast!

> >
> > Of course they don't ... How about specifications that don't
> provide adequate support for the actual stress levels.
>
> Corrected at the sub far before any formal testing is commenced

by

> the prime.

I meant tolerances that don't quite work under unexpected stresses?
But I expect you knew this and are just trying to worm your way out.

You don't really know what you're trying to say, do you. You just
don't have anything better to do except make things up on the fly.
Your once-again stupid statement on tolerances (originally written
as 'specifications') is obvious why you said it that way. I wish I
had a hack like you on my staff 8 years ago. What fun!

> Then it's not a fault of the spec, so what's your point?

Yes it is the fault of the spec, that is my point, and saying
otherwise is a cop out.

Waawaawaa once again when you're dead wrong.

So, you're saying airplanes NEVER fail? Do you know how stupid you
look now.

What'd you do, look that one up? Or make it up? You're out of your
minor league here. When an expert tries to discuss something with a
nut and finds the nut is just looking for something to do by
blabbering nonsense, he ridicules the nut and waits for another
irritable response.

It sounds fishy since you indicated you were an addict back in the
early 90s.

That's 1990-1996 for the clarity that somehow isn't consistently
required on the geek's part. You'll believe that because it's a
negative. What you have trouble with is the turn-around and how I'm
able to do what you cannot figure out. That's your problem now.

Everyone always "takes" the luck when it comes their way. Could you
possibly say something even MORE stupid?

Yeah, you so-called optimal play bananas take the money from every
winning hand and put it right back into the machine because you just
can't stop playing. Brilliant 'take'. That's how the machines stay
filled up for when I get there.

I would never touch Joses' Familia, but it doesn't suprise me that
you would.

Again, a little inexperience here Dicky?

No, they invented word processors because they were a more

efficient solution. No middle man (or lady) required. This is the
third example of your complete lack of business sense in the last two
days, Mr. MBS.

Deny my statement isn't included in 'efficient solution'. Then you'll
see why all you are is a hack who tries to make believe he knows
waaaay more than he does. Your only expertise is in theorizing--
something any child can do even better.

I see, by "the casino", you must mean the janitor takes over and
orders new machines without the approval of management. ROTFLMAO.

Even though you use that twisted wording once again, I see you've
discovered America here for a change.

> You are a true Bozo. $300,000 is from YOU. And the deposit rests
with ME. You're sooooo thick it's hilarios! But then, Hubert

Humphrey wasn't too bright either, and he's the guy all you Canadien-
Americans always quote when you're having troubles.

You want me to send you $300,000?

Yup. You got the money honey?

···

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

#251

> Now explain that malarky. If someone plays 50,000 hands, it

depends on luck if the player wins or not. BUT, if they play those
50,000 hands a thousand more times, after that then those clumps of
50,000 hands have results that are somehow linked to a skill that
wasn't there in the early-on bunch of 50,000 hands??? Now do you see
how much of a jerk you look like?

No, I see what an idiot you are. All of the results from your
thousand 50,000 hand examples will be DIFFERENT.

No lick, Dick!! But look at the stupid thing you said first--that the
early-on will results are from luck and then it magically turns to
skill. None of them are any different, Ace. If it's luck now it's
luck forever. It doesn't change because you want it to, or because
you bought some guru tool that make you feel better when you lose.

> As I said, you're day starts with a visit to my site, and it

never ends. The words you posted were diretly taken from one of my

> strategies.

Sure they were, Princess ... How many more lies do you have in you?

I'll leave that in again and maybe you'll admit to it this time.

> You mean Dilbert's practice, don't you? You know, that guy you
> dressed up in a suit.

You don't have the slightest clue, do you? And I'm beginning to

think Dilberts' manager is MUCH smarter than you are.

Put the doughnut down and do some thinking instead of eating for a
change.

···

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

#252

> Come to think of it, if you're the video poker brute you pretend

to be and do go to all those ridiculous Indian casinos to play

> and "watch others play" who's watching you???

Like I said, I don't care.

Oh you care allright. If not, you wouldn't have brought it up. So
what's today's schedule, chief? Going on over to the Injun joint so
the witch doctor can laugh at you once again? I'm laughing already!!!

> Me me me me. You are nothing more than make believe every time

you whine. What'd you do--have a tough day at the Injun joint as they

> laughed at you some more for playing their stupid oej game again?

See, you did it again.

I know. I made you look like a weeny again.

> That's what losers do, and you are such a loser. Anyone who runs

around the country after scraping together a few bucks just to play
at Indian casinos while taking a few side trips to other gaming
locations has a big problem. That's why I'm here--to tell you about
it because you'll never admit to such a compulsion.

Like I said, wrong again, Princess. But I tell you what. I'll tell
exactly what I do around the country as soon as you spit out your
real name. What's that, little Robbie just had another accident in
her panties.

Let's see, my name is worth you making a true fool out of yourself by
admitting to the fact that you cannot take a non-video poker/non-
Indian casino vacation any more! Put your wife on and let's see what
SHE has to say about that. Give her a chance, unlike how Jean Scott
ruined her live-in's life by turning him into a compulsive vp player,
and Dancer wrecked his wife's by doing the same!

> Don't forget the real maple syrup, because geeks like to sugar-

coat what they say when they have to rely on other people's theories

> because they can't figure something out on their own.

Waffle, waffle.

That was good, so i'll leave that in there too.

Now to the bet: Do it my way or your fired. Pure & simple. Cry all
you want about it, but it's my bet and I make the rules. Especially
with inferior geeks.

···

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

#253

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

wrote:

> > I have to admit, my ego gets a TREMENDOUS boost every time you
> post, as it nearly all seems to be the product of a menstral-

mouth.

>
> Another example of your intellectual capability. And, I see you
> didn't refute my claim. I guess you've accepted being a yellow
coward.

Your claims are of no value, and are that of a disgruntled old man
looking for entertainment in his declining years.

And did I mention that I thoroughly enjoy watching you wake up a

fool

every morning by heading directly to your computer to read the
insults I fling your way? You're like a whiny whipping post, where
you ask for it, then complain about it, and then ask for more. It's

a

blast!

Bring it on Princess. I love it when you get all bothered. More of
your projected self-loathing.

>
> > >
> > > Of course they don't ... How about specifications that don't
> > provide adequate support for the actual stress levels.
> >
> > Corrected at the sub far before any formal testing is commenced
by
> > the prime.
>
> I meant tolerances that don't quite work under unexpected

stresses?

> But I expect you knew this and are just trying to worm your way

out.

You don't really know what you're trying to say, do you. You just
don't have anything better to do except make things up on the fly.
Your once-again stupid statement on tolerances (originally written
as 'specifications') is obvious why you said it that way. I wish I
had a hack like you on my staff 8 years ago. What fun!

So, you don't even understand that tolerances are often given as part
of the specs. In orther words, you completely bluffing and now
realize I know a LOT more about specs than do. And, I thought it was
5 years ago ...

>
> > Then it's not a fault of the spec, so what's your point?
>
> Yes it is the fault of the spec, that is my point, and saying
> otherwise is a cop out.

Waawaawaa once again when you're dead wrong.

Need I say more. You know I'm right and have nothihng to offer in
defense of your idiotic statements.

>
> So, you're saying airplanes NEVER fail? Do you know how stupid

you

> look now.

What'd you do, look that one up? Or make it up? You're out of your
minor league here. When an expert tries to discuss something with a
nut and finds the nut is just looking for something to do by
blabbering nonsense, he ridicules the nut and waits for another
irritable response.

ROTFL. Couldn't come with anything again, Princess? You are such a
loser.

>
> It sounds fishy since you indicated you were an addict back in

the

> early 90s.

That's 1990-1996 for the clarity that somehow isn't consistently
required on the geek's part. You'll believe that because it's a
negative. What you have trouble with is the turn-around and how I'm
able to do what you cannot figure out. That's your problem now.

So, is it 5 years? 8 years? 14 years? You made it all up?

>
> Everyone always "takes" the luck when it comes their way. Could

you

> possibly say something even MORE stupid?

Yeah,

I knew that.

you so-called optimal play bananas take the money from every
winning hand and put it right back into the machine because you

just

can't stop playing. Brilliant 'take'. That's how the machines stay
filled up for when I get there.

And you proved it. This is even MORE stupid than the previous remark.

>
> I would never touch Joses' Familia, but it doesn't suprise me

that

> you would.

Again, a little inexperience here Dicky?

ROTFLMAO. Do people often walk away from you shaking their heads? You
missed it entirely, Princess. God, I can't breathe ...

>
> No, they invented word processors because they were a more
efficient solution. No middle man (or lady) required. This is the
third example of your complete lack of business sense in the last

two

days, Mr. MBS.

Deny my statement isn't included in 'efficient solution'.

As soon as I get the tears out of my eyes from the last one ... Whew,
OK. I deny it. When word processors showed up the error rates
initially INCREASED. Inexperience. It didn't get much better until
spell checkers showed up.

>
> > You are a true Bozo. $300,000 is from YOU. And the deposit

rests

> with ME. You're sooooo thick it's hilarios! But then, Hubert
Humphrey wasn't too bright either, and he's the guy all you

Canadien-

Americans always quote when you're having troubles.
>
> You want me to send you $300,000?

Yup. You got the money honey?

The Princess of Cowards has reneged on her offer and won't even admit
it. Let me explain just it works so you can sniffle some more. You
put a challenge on the table--10000:1 that I wouldn't show up at Sams
Town to meet you--I accepted your challenge (for $60). Now, you can
either honor that challenge or pull it from the table(renege), So,
Princess, which is it? Agree or tell everyone your reneging.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

#254

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

wrote:

> > Now explain that malarky. If someone plays 50,000 hands, it
depends on luck if the player wins or not. BUT, if they play those
50,000 hands a thousand more times, after that then those clumps of
50,000 hands have results that are somehow linked to a skill that
wasn't there in the early-on bunch of 50,000 hands??? Now do you

see

how much of a jerk you look like?
>
> No, I see what an idiot you are. All of the results from your
> thousand 50,000 hand examples will be DIFFERENT.

No lick, Dick!! But look at the stupid thing you said first--that

the

early-on will results are from luck and then it magically turns to
skill. None of them are any different, Ace. If it's luck now it's
luck forever. It doesn't change because you want it to, or because
you bought some guru tool that make you feel better when you lose.

I see you snipped the rest of my response that perfectly explained
what you just belched out. Let me cut and paste it back in so you
have another chance to ignore it .... "Some will be wins
(could even be the first several) and others will be losses. That's
where the luck comes into play. After the 50,000,000 hands (actually
much fewer) the results average out and the luck factor is
overwhelmed by the influence of consistently playing skillfully. I
realize these FACTs are way above your intellect and I don't expect a
reasonable reply from you even though this is just the application of
statistics 101."

Guess what? I didn't get a reasonable reply from you.

> > As I said, you're day starts with a visit to my site, and it
never ends. The words you posted were diretly taken from one of my
> > strategies.
>
> Sure they were, Princess ... How many more lies do you have in

you?

I'll leave that in again and maybe you'll admit to it this time.

Same response, How many more lies do you have in you?

>
> > You mean Dilbert's practice, don't you? You know, that guy you
> > dressed up in a suit.
>
> You don't have the slightest clue, do you? And I'm beginning to
think Dilberts' manager is MUCH smarter than you are.

Put the doughnut down and do some thinking instead of eating for a
change.

Princess, there's that projected self loathing again. You'd better
set up another appointment with a shrink. This time find one that can
help you out.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

#255

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

wrote:

> > Come to think of it, if you're the video poker brute you

pretend

to be and do go to all those ridiculous Indian casinos to play
> > and "watch others play" who's watching you???
>
> Like I said, I don't care.

Oh you care allright. If not, you wouldn't have brought it up.

I didn't bring anything up. You asked me a question and I answered
it.

So
what's today's schedule, chief? Going on over to the Injun joint so
the witch doctor can laugh at you once again? I'm laughing

already!!!

Sorry to disappoint you, Princess, but I just finished 18 holes of
golf. I suspect you slept in and can't move after getting drunk once
more.

>
> > That's what losers do, and you are such a loser. Anyone who

runs

around the country after scraping together a few bucks just to play
at Indian casinos while taking a few side trips to other gaming
locations has a big problem. That's why I'm here--to tell you about
it because you'll never admit to such a compulsion.
>
> Like I said, wrong again, Princess. But I tell you what. I'll

tell

> exactly what I do around the country as soon as you spit out your
> real name. What's that, little Robbie just had another accident

in

> her panties.

Let's see, my name is worth you making a true fool out of yourself

by

admitting to the fact that you cannot take a non-video poker/non-
Indian casino vacation any more! Put your wife on and let's see

what

SHE has to say about that.

First your name, Princess. And, my wife is more of a gambler than I
am. Speaking of wives, how many times have you been divorced now?

>
> > Don't forget the real maple syrup, because geeks like to sugar-
coat what they say when they have to rely on other people's

theories

> > because they can't figure something out on their own.
>
> Waffle, waffle.

That was good, so i'll leave that in there too.

Waffle on, Princess. So, what is it today? Do you remember who Reid
is or not?

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:

#256

> Your claims are of no value, and are that of a disgruntled old

man looking for entertainment in his declining years. And did I
mention that I thoroughly enjoy watching you wake up a fool every
morning by heading directly to your computer to read the insults I
fling your way? You're like a whiny whipping post, where you ask for
it, then complain about it, and then ask for more. It's a blast!

Bring it on Princess. I love it when you get all bothered. More of
your projected self-loathing.

Wait a minute! Wait a minute!! Let me crack up again!!!

So, you don't even understand that tolerances are often given as

part of the specs. In orther words, you completely bluffing and now

realize I know a LOT more about specs than do. And, I thought it

was 5 years ago ...

Hello McFly!! Tolerances are ALWAYS identified in aircraft specs.
Hello!! You're such a phony, and for your own self-confidence boost.
Just as in video poker and all you wish were true.
You know less about tolerances and specs than you do video poker
reality, and it shows more by the minute. May I suggest if you know
anyone on this forum that you cut your losses before they write you
another personal message saying what a bafoon you are? Oh wait a
minute--you don't know HOW to cut them do you, just like in vp.

Need I say more. You know I'm right and have nothihng to offer in
defense of your idiotic statements.

And your message means anything? "I'm right and you're not" I'm
right and you're wrong". As usual, no input. Just crybabying.

> That's 1990-1996 for the clarity that somehow isn't consistently
> required on the geek's part. You'll believe that because it's a
> negative. What you have trouble with is the turn-around and how

I'm able to do what you cannot figure out. That's your problem now.

So, is it 5 years? 8 years? 14 years? You made it all up?

I see it's a REAL problem for that pea brain now. Remember I said 5?
That's f-i-v-e.

> you so-called optimal play bananas take the money from every
> winning hand and put it right back into the machine because you
just can't stop playing. Brilliant 'take'. That's how the machines

stay filled up for when I get there.

And you proved it. This is even MORE stupid than the previous

remark.

Optimal play bananas? I like it, and it has a nice ring to it for the
geeks who look stupid playing that way.

ROTFLMAO.

What does that mean--you are tiring from typing?

Do people often walk away from you shaking their heads?

Yes, in agreement to whatever I say. But if you stop breathing that's
not so good for your health. All that blubber requires extra oxygen
at all times.

> Deny my statement isn't included in 'efficient solution'.

As soon as I get the tears out of my eyes from the last one ...

Whew, OK. I deny it. When word processors showed up the error rates

initially INCREASED. Inexperience. It didn't get much better until
spell checkers showed up.

HaHaHa! Did you type your latest diet out on a word processor or a
typewriter? Which one made more sense and was EASIER? And may I
suggest a good cry now and then. It'll rid the body of all the salt
that's the second most cause of your skyrocketing high-blood pressure
besides me!

> > You want me to send you $300,000?
>
> Yup. You got the money honey?

Answer the question and stop trying to make yourself feel better when
you have little or no response AGAIN.

···

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

#257

After the 50,000,000 hands (actuallymuch fewer) the results average
out and the luck factor isoverwhelmed by the influence of
consistently playing skillfully. Irealize these FACTs are way above
your intellect and I don't expect areasonable reply from you even
though this is just the application ofstatistics 101."

You see what a dope you turn into when cornered? All you can go back
on and say AGAIN is "but gee Rob, if you add them all up, it at some
unknown time turns into skill". In other words, you know I'm right
and you have no answer for me, just as Dan Paymar and Bob Dancer (2
of your idols) did several years ago. Listen up Bozo: If 1 hand's
outcome is determined by luck they ALL are, and no magical wishing
for some theoretical unknown skill will ever change that.

>
> Put the doughnut down and do some thinking instead of eating for

a change.

Princess, there's that projected self loathing again. You'd better
set up another appointment with a shrink. This time find one that

can help you out.

I guess you didn't like that one bit. Maybe I'll send you a $15 gift
certificate to Krispy Kreme so you can have a way to work off your
anguish.

···

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

#258

I didn't bring anything up. You asked me a question and I answered
it.

It's childish to say "No I didn't!" when you did.

Sorry to disappoint you, Princess, but I just finished 18 holes of
golf. I suspect you slept in and can't move after getting drunk

once more.

Golf! HA! I should have guessed. A lazy man's game if there ever was
one. I'm glad you're old enough to play. I guess it didn't snow up
there today.

> Let's see, my name is worth you making a true fool out of

yourself by admitting to the fact that you cannot take a non-video
poker/non-Indian casino vacation any more! Put your wife on and let's
see what SHE has to say about that.

First your name, Princess.

After you explain the value of it.

And, my wife is more of a gambler than I am.

You mean your wife has a bigger butt than YOU do? And how many packs
do you healthy specimens go through a day?

Speaking of wives, how many times have you been divorced now?

You should read my columns again. I know you'll hate this, but 0!

···

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

#259

It's funny how things happen. In the middle of a one-sided chat as I
attempt to get through to self-confirmed Ad-Dick, I experienced yet
another incident that will only eat further away at poor Ricky's
nerves. And that ain't good at his age. But he asks for it, and he
continually takes it from behind on every issue. I guess, besides a
brutally tiring round of golf on the one good day a week up there,
that's how he gets his 'workout'.

A newsletter member from my site who is on his way to LV from Rhode
Island made a stopover today so he could learn more of my standard
Romp Thru Town Play Strategy. I met him at the local Injun casino
(Casino Arizona at Talking Stick) where he was prepared to play 100
credits each on 25c/50c/$1/$2--cashing out every time he got $10
ahead minimum, and doing it a total of 3 times. The machines at the
bar all have only 7/5 JB with a sequential RF bonus of 50,000 on
25c/50c/$1, and 6/5 BP with the sequential bonus. I know these are
games Dicky at least SAYS he will stay away from at all costs,
because 'it's impossible to win on them', but since I only train and
never play professionally at ANY Indian place, Randall was prepared
to do it with his money.

The 1st session ended on 50c and an overall profit of $12.50. The
next one ended at $2 with a SF in diamonds (7-J) for a profit of
$235. The last one ended at $2 again with four Aces for a profit of
$695. Dick, please add that up on your slide rule. Never mind--too
slow. It's +$942.50. And guess what? This guy has never played BP in
his life, and has not seen four natural Aces on his precious FPDW at
Sunset Station for as long as he can remember.

So let's see, if he wanted to play the addict way of nothing but one
denomination - on and on with no goals, rhyme or reason - even after
those four Aces he'd be stuck $48. Now doesn't that just turn you on?
Naturally, the geek will say "but gee Rob, please play fair
here!" "If Randall were playing a POSITIVE game like FPDW, there's a
whole bunch of math models and probability theories by Bilbo Jazbo,
Reid my lips, and MYSELF that say he might possibly could have
probably won something, and at least enough that when he continued
playing on and on like a moronic math geek, he might possible could
probably have had enough credits left to hit a royal."

Now you see even more clearly after today's event why I win and those
neurotics do not.

#260

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

wrote:

> I didn't bring anything up. You asked me a question and I

answered

> it.

It's childish to say "No I didn't!" when you did.

No, it's simply the truth, Princess. Something you know nothing about.

>
> Sorry to disappoint you, Princess, but I just finished 18 holes

of

> golf. I suspect you slept in and can't move after getting drunk
once more.

Golf! HA! I should have guessed. A lazy man's game if there ever

was

one. I'm glad you're old enough to play. I guess it didn't snow up
there today.

It was 100 below with a 70 mph wind, and, I had to trudge through 6
feet of snow. Especially difficult on those long par 5s. If that
wasn't bad enough a pack of hungry wolves came after me and I had to
fight them off with my bare hands. It did make for a nice wolf stew
tonight. Just another lazy day ...

>
> > Let's see, my name is worth you making a true fool out of
yourself by admitting to the fact that you cannot take a non-video
poker/non-Indian casino vacation any more! Put your wife on and

let's

see what SHE has to say about that.
>
> First your name, Princess.

After you explain the value of it.

Your name, absolutely no value. You continuing to be a coward ...
priceless.

>And, my wife is more of a gambler than I am.

You mean your wife has a bigger butt than YOU do? And how many

packs

do you healthy specimens go through a day?

No and zero. How many gallons of booze do you go through? Wait, I
forget, it's a progression so your last 20 drinks only count as 4.

Speaking of wives, how many times have you been divorced now?

You should read my columns again.

Never will, Princess. Unless of course, you plan to write about how
you reneged on the bet you offered me.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote: