vpFREE2 Forums

Refreshing information

#121

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rgmustain" <rgmustain@a...>
wrote:
> I outlined them in my post that you glossed over. Like I said,

you

> can't seem to keep up.

The 'outline' is what I'm referring to, dufus. A person outlines
when they have no intention of submitting a complete response.

No, they "outline" as a general comment on a post. You use line-by-
line responses to cover those specific items. Please try to keep up.

And
to further depict your lack of abilities here, you 'can' your
outline into some sort of standard remarks. Has anyone outside of
where you used to work YEARS ago ever called you lazy?

Nope.

>
> Now that's a really intelligent statement?? You state I'm
not "very good with even that", referring to boredom. I believe you
unwittingly just stated I'm not really bored. Even you standard
response #4 is getting weak.

This is where your deterioration becomes most pronounced. "Not good
even with boredom" means as a bored person with not much else to

do,

Well, then I stand corrected. You were just being redundant ... again.

>
> Then by all means keep up the age insults. Oh, and don't forget

to

> look in the mirror.

Right now I don't know what you look like or how much you weigh--

but

I can guess the overall picture ain't pretty.

With your history of guesses I would think you'd have given up by now.

Which brings up
another one of my requirements for being a successful video poker
player: Immense self-confidence, self-respect, and always doing the
things that keep a player at that level.

(Standard response #2.) The only thing "Immense" about you is your
ego.

Look around at ANY locals
casino in ANY gambling town. What you see are mostly overweight and
a whole lot of obese fat-asses sitting at the machines, they dress
like they just got out of a K-Mart Blue-Lite special, a very high
percentage of them smoke, most of them drink far too much for their
own good, their overall cleanliness is usually in question, the
majority of those who even have bank cards use casino ATM's,

attempt

to cash checks, or apply for 3-digit casino credit limits, and many
of them can't wait for the buffets to open in order for them to

have

something to look forward to. In other words, video poker players
are, in general, a sad slice of our population.

(Standard response #5.) I think it's time for you to visit that
shrink again. Your inferiority complex is getting the best of you.
Self-confident people don't go around looking at (and denigrating)
others. They don't need to.

Now match yourself
up against all this and tell yourself where you fit in. And then
guess why I'm a consistent winner.

None of the above. Now, where were we. Oh, yeah, I'm still waiting
for a proof that your flat earth system can overcome a negative
expectation.

···

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

#122

> The 'outline' is what I'm referring to, dufus. A person outlines
> when they have no intention of submitting a complete response.

No, they "outline" as a general comment on a post. You use line-by-
line responses to cover those specific items. Please try to keep up.

And this is why I'm the writer and you are not.

Has anyone outside of where you used to work YEARS ago ever called
you lazy?

Nope.

If you claim I'm a liar with no facts to support that position, and
you refuse our of fear of being wrong to meet me in LV to do
everything possible in reviewing past records to prove I'm not, then
YOU must be the only truthful person left on the Internet. Do you see
how stupid you look? That's the view I get every time I open this
forum up and see a message from 'Dick'.
  

Well, then I stand corrected. You were just being redundant ...

again.

I'm not sure you know what you wrote here, but part of it seems
correct.

> I can guess the overall picture ain't pretty.
With your history of guesses I would think you'd have given up by

now.

Again, no proof from "the man who lives for proof". I have no doubt
I'm right.

(Standard response #2.) The only thing "Immense" about you is your
ego.

Self-confidence and self-respect are requirements for a video poker
player to be a professional and win at. So if it's my immense ego
that replaces those phrases while you speak them, then that's 100%
acceptable to me!

> Look around at ANY locals
> casino in ANY gambling town. What you see are mostly overweight

and a whole lot of obese fat-asses sitting at the machines, they
dress like they just got out of a K-Mart Blue-Lite special, a very
high percentage of them smoke, most of them drink far too much for
their own good, their overall cleanliness is usually in question, the
majority of those who even have bank cards use casino ATM's, attempt

> to cash checks, or apply for 3-digit casino credit limits, and

many of them can't wait for the buffets to open in order for them to

have something to look forward to. In other words, video poker

players are, in general, a sad slice of our population.

(Standard response #5.) I think it's time for you to visit that
shrink again. Your inferiority complex is getting the best of you.
Self-confident people don't go around looking at (and denigrating)
others. They don't need to.

You're a world apart and several levels down from where I am, and
that bothers you, doesn't it. I notice everything in casinos because
it's my profession. You dream, analyze, theorize, and make believe.
If you didn't belong into the impressive group i mentioned above (and
I left it in for you to read and weep about once again) you'd not be
complaining about what I say about it. And have I ever been to a
shrink? Yeah, once. It was required--when I came back from
Afghanastan in '02.

None of the above. Now, where were we. Oh, yeah, I'm still waiting
for a proof that your flat earth system can overcome a negative
expectation.

Let's stay with this for another moment. Take your clothes off and
stand in front of the mirror. Then have any 3 people write down what
they think of you as a person and put that into a hat. What would you
look at first?

···

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

#123

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

wrote:

> > The 'outline' is what I'm referring to, dufus. A person

outlines

> > when they have no intention of submitting a complete response.
>
> No, they "outline" as a general comment on a post. You use line-

by-

> line responses to cover those specific items. Please try to keep

up.

And this is why I'm the writer and you are not.

Please try to post something that makes sense next time. You clearly
have a poor handle on the English language and grammar. Your editor
must have had a BIG job.

Has anyone outside of where you used to work YEARS ago ever called
you lazy?
>
> Nope.
>
If you claim I'm a liar with no facts to support that position, and
you refuse our of fear of being wrong to meet me in LV to do
everything possible in reviewing past records to prove I'm not,

then

YOU must be the only truthful person left on the Internet.

Yes, you are a liar which I have shown many times over. You also seem
to have completely lost control of your keyboard.

Do you see
how stupid you look? That's the view I get every time I open this
forum up and see a message from 'Dick'.

Well, your view has been shown to be completely clouded by your ego
and the desire to be the guru you can never be.

> Well, then I stand corrected. You were just being redundant ...
again.

I'm not sure you know what you wrote here,

Not surprising.

but part of it seems correct.

Yes, the part about you being redundant. To help you out, I used
the "... again" so you'd understand what redundant meant.

>
> > I can guess the overall picture ain't pretty.
> With your history of guesses I would think you'd have given up by
now.

Again, no proof from "the man who lives for proof". I have no doubt
I'm right.

Proof of what? That you are a lousy guesser? Anyone who reads this
forum can clearly see how many mistaken guesses you've made about me.
For example, First, you called me an addict. Now I'm a wannabee. And
then, you started calling me old when we are both 50-somethings. I
really doubt you wanted to infer that you were old and senile. What
will you get wrong next?

>
> (Standard response #2.) The only thing "Immense" about you is

your

> ego.

Self-confidence and self-respect are requirements for a video poker
player to be a professional and win at.

They probably help but they are not a requirement.

So if it's my immense ego
that replaces those phrases while you speak them, then that's 100%
acceptable to me!

Actually, there is no correlation between them.

You're a world apart and several levels down from where I am, and
that bothers you, doesn't it. I notice everything in casinos

because

it's my profession.

Sure you do. Better get that ego in check, it's coming through as
lies again.

You dream, analyze, theorize, and make believe.

You're right on the first three. 3 out 4 ain't bad.

If you didn't belong into the impressive group i mentioned above

(and

I left it in for you to read and weep about once again) you'd not

be

complaining about what I say about it.

By "impressive group" I assume you're referring to "self-confident",
thanks.

And have I ever been to a
shrink? Yeah, once. It was required--when I came back from
Afghanastan in '02.

You really need to go back.

>
> None of the above. Now, where were we. Oh, yeah, I'm still

waiting

> for a proof that your flat earth system can overcome a negative
> expectation.

Let's stay with this for another moment. Take your clothes off and
stand in front of the mirror. Then have any 3 people write down

what

they think of you as a person and put that into a hat. What would

you

look at first?

ROTFL. Is this the most intelligent comment you can come up with?

It's obvious that you want to turn this discussion into a personal
conflict so you can avoid the real issue. "Does your flat earth
system turn a negative game into a positive expection"? The reason is
that you know your system doesn't help at all. The real proof is
already there for anyone to see, it's Reid's proof.

Awaiting standard response #1 ...

Dick

···

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

#124

Please try to post something that makes sense next time.

Why? You certainly don't. Looks like even with all that self-
proclaimed intellect, you still can't communicate well.

You clearly have a poor handle on the English language and grammar.
Your editor must have had a BIG job.

More jealousy, and it always gets back to that. But I understand.

> Do you see
> how stupid you look? That's the view I get every time I open this
> forum up and see a message from 'Dick'.

Well, your view has been shown to be completely clouded by your ego
and the desire to be the guru you can never be.

I am what people like you make me to be. The ego is automatic, and
I'm very comfortable with it all. What I see of you is an angry
individual who probably argues with his wife all the time because she
isn't perfect.

   
Yes, the part about you being redundant. To help you out, I used
the "... again" so you'd understand what redundant meant.

My mind operates several levels higher than yours--which you know--so
it still makes no sense.

Proof of what? That you are a lousy guesser? Anyone who reads this
forum can clearly see how many mistaken guesses you've made about

me. For example, First, you called me an addict.

Have you proven that you're not?

Now I'm a wannabee.

You clearly enjoy having me write to you. If I were nearby you'd rush
over for an autograph.

And

then, you started calling me old when we are both 50-somethings. I
really doubt you wanted to infer that you were old and senile. What
will you get wrong next?

And have you proved your age yet? A picture will do, although I
really do understand why you're hesitant to do so. Now do you get it?
The "God of I-Need-Proof" won't prove anything when asked.

They probably help but they are not a requirement.

Again, you're an armchair amateur, and if you
say 'probably', 'maybe', 'it's suppose to' and all that type
nonsense, your "I'm a neurotic math geek" personality becomes a
conflict. But when I say it is a requirement, that is an absolute.

Actually, there is no correlation between them.

You slip up so often. You might as well tell us who YOU THINK won the
Yankee game tonight without any details.

> You dream, analyze, theorize, and make believe.
You're right on the first three. 3 out 4 ain't bad.

#4 is compiled of the sum of the first 3. Figure that one out
professor.

You really need to go back.

I did, but only to the border. Where were you hiding? Or were you a
draft dodger for Vietnam?

> Let's stay with this for another moment. Take your clothes off

and stand in front of the mirror. Then have any 3 people write down

what they think of you as a person and put that into a hat. What

would you look at first?

ROTFL. Is this the most intelligent comment you can come up with?

HAHAHA!! Not so easy to test your self-respect & self-confidence, is
it. Right away you want to "change the subject". That says it
all.....about everything about you. I'd like to see if anyone within
300 yards of you right now would take issue to the statement "Imagine
waking up next to THAT in the morning!"

It's obvious that you want to turn this discussion into a personal
conflict so you can avoid the real issue. "Does your flat earth
system turn a negative game into a positive expection"?

No. It creates pockets of good luck that are taken advantage of
immediately, and on the next trip the cycle starts at the beginning
again. Results: consistency in profit-taking, medium risk, infrequent
disasters, and a higher frequency of greater-than-median wins. Source-
-Historical data realized after strategy development and extensive
practice period.

No one, including you nerds who look funny, act funny, and think
strangely, has the advantage over any casino regardless of the
theoretical payback %, cash back, free this and that, smiles from the
host who's hosing all of you, a pat on the back from Bob 'slip-a-
dollar-into-my-pocket' Dancer, or the over-valuation of the Queen's
roomful of casino slot-club junk.

···

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

#125

Dick: While you're getting your beauty sleep up in the woods, I'm
thinking you'll wake up and be refreshed by this. Did you ever notice
the title of our thread? Yes, I supply Refreshing Information to
players all the time.

I'll be taking a break from straightening you and some of the other
readers out for a few days beginning Wed. at 3am. I'll be going to
Nevada until Sat. overnight, and no, I won't be taking some geek
laptop along with me to record results, keep in touch with computer
fairies, or practice my play in my rooms. Come to think of it, since
you believe in all the nonsense about frequency-of-occurence of
winning hands and royals, why don't you simply spend all this down
time playing you're beloved Winpoker instead. That way, if you get in
95,000 hands without any significant winners, you can go right on
over to your local casino and ALMOST FOR SURE you'll hit the big one!
Why, you've gotten all those theoretical losing hands out of the way,
and the math models say you should hit something sooner or later, do
they not? Otherwise, when Dancer says something stupid like "It
doesn't matter if I lose today--I KNOW I'll be OK in the long-term"
what would be the point? What's the difference where you play or when
you play--it's all one big long experience, is it not, professor?

#126

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

wrote:

> Please try to post something that makes sense next time.

Why? You certainly don't.

I must have, you understood me this time.

You clearly have a poor handle on the English language and grammar.
Your editor must have had a BIG job.

More jealousy, and it always gets back to that. But I understand.

I've seen a real tendency on your part to describe others with you
own shortcomings. Each time I read one of your rants it's obviously
just a reflection of your own psyche. Please, keep it up. It's a
great window into your self-image.

> Well, your view has been shown to be completely clouded by your

ego

> and the desire to be the guru you can never be.

I am what people like you make me to be. The ego is automatic, and
I'm very comfortable with it all. What I see of you is an angry
individual who probably argues with his wife all the time because

she

isn't perfect.

Your window's wide open Rob, I get another view of your life.

>
> Yes, the part about you being redundant. To help you out, I used
> the "... again" so you'd understand what redundant meant.

My mind operates several levels higher than yours--which you know--

so

it still makes no sense.

I wholeheartly agree when you say "My mind ... makes no sense".

>
> Proof of what? That you are a lousy guesser? Anyone who reads

this

> forum can clearly see how many mistaken guesses you've made about
me. For example, First, you called me an addict.

Have you proven that you're not?

Now I'm a wannabee.

You clearly enjoy having me write to you. If I were nearby you'd

rush

over for an autograph.

Another glance into your mind.

And
> then, you started calling me old when we are both 50-somethings.

I

> really doubt you wanted to infer that you were old and senile.

What

> will you get wrong next?

And have you proved your age yet? A picture will do, although I
really do understand why you're hesitant to do so. Now do you get

it?

The "God of I-Need-Proof" won't prove anything when asked.

Once again I need to remind you this discussion is about your flat
earth system. I could care less how old you think I am. I'm very
comforatble with my age, since, to quote and old cliche, it's better
than the alternative.

>
> They probably help but they are not a requirement.

Again, you're an armchair amateur, and if you
say 'probably', 'maybe', 'it's suppose to' and all that type
nonsense, your "I'm a neurotic math geek" personality becomes a
conflict. But when I say it is a requirement, that is an absolute.

One of the signs of your low intelligence is you only think in black
and white. The world does not work that way. There a lots of grey
areas. However, there are some "absolutes". For example, it is
absolutely true that your flat earth system cannot change a negative
game into a positive expectation.

>
> > You dream, analyze, theorize, and make believe.
> You're right on the first three. 3 out 4 ain't bad.

#4 is compiled of the sum of the first 3. Figure that one out
professor.

I think you'd better go back to the dictionary on that one. How can
you write something so stupid for everyone to see?

>
> You really need to go back.

I did, but only to the border. Where were you hiding? Or were you a
draft dodger for Vietnam?

Wrong again. However, many of the veitnam draft dodgers were folks
with strong convictions and were basically proven to be right.

>
> > Let's stay with this for another moment. Take your clothes off
and stand in front of the mirror. Then have any 3 people write down
> what they think of you as a person and put that into a hat. What
would you look at first?
>
> ROTFL. Is this the most intelligent comment you can come up with?

HAHAHA!! Not so easy to test your self-respect & self-confidence,

is

it.

Is that what that was? I thought you were just a sick pervert.

Right away you want to "change the subject". That says it
all.....about everything about you. I'd like to see if anyone

within

300 yards of you right now would take issue to the

statement "Imagine

waking up next to THAT in the morning!"

Another peak into the window of your personality.

>
> It's obvious that you want to turn this discussion into a

personal

> conflict so you can avoid the real issue. "Does your flat earth
> system turn a negative game into a positive expection"?

No.

It's about time you admitted it.

It creates pockets of good luck that are taken advantage of
immediately, and on the next trip the cycle starts at the beginning
again.

And how does it do this? You have yet to explain this. Of course, it
doesn't, "pockets of good luck" happen to anyone who gambles and has
nothing to do with your system.

Results: consistency in profit-taking, medium risk, infrequent
disasters, and a higher frequency of greater-than-median wins.

Source-

-Historical data realized after strategy development and extensive
practice period.

Of ONE person. Just like a lottery winner.
  

No one, including you nerds who look funny, act funny, and think
strangely,

Another glimpse into that window.

has the advantage over any casino

I thought you claimed you had an advantage. Was that all just another
lie? What a surprise ...

···

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

#127

Dick: While you're getting your beauty sleep up in the woods,
I'm
thinking you'll wake up and be refreshed by this. Did you ever

notice

the title of our thread? Yes, I supply Refreshing Information to
players all the time.

In your mind.

I'll be taking a break from straightening you and some of the other
readers out for a few days beginning Wed. at 3am. I'll be going to
Nevada until Sat. overnight,

A break would do you good given your last few posts.

and no, I won't be taking some geek
laptop along with me to record results, keep in touch with computer
fairies, or practice my play in my rooms. Come to think of it,

since

you believe in all the nonsense about frequency-of-occurence of
winning hands and royals, why don't you simply spend all this down
time playing you're beloved Winpoker instead. That way, if you get

in

95,000 hands without any significant winners, you can go right on
over to your local casino and ALMOST FOR SURE you'll hit the big

one!

If you knew anything about advantage play you'd understand that your
statement is completely erroneous. However, since it's the basis of
your flat earth system, I'm not surprised you'd write it.

and the math models say you should hit something sooner or later,

do

they not?

No, they simply provide you with probabilities.

Otherwise, when Dancer says something stupid like "It
doesn't matter if I lose today--I KNOW I'll be OK in the long-term"

Sounds like one of your "pockets of good luck". So, you agree with
Dancer on this one?

what would be the point? What's the difference where you play or

when

you play--it's all one big long experience, is it not, professor?

Yes, it is. Please explain how ALL your previous gambling experience
is anything else. Do your wins on a Tuesday count more than wins on
Friday?

···

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

#128

I've seen a real tendency on your part to describe others with you
own shortcomings. Each time I read one of your rants it's obviously
just a reflection of your own psyche. Please, keep it up. It's a
great window into your self-image.

OK, now show me EVIDENCE of that, Mr. Wizard! What you 'feel' as a
now useless old man with nothing to do doesn't qualify you as a
shrink....or does it?

Your window's wide open Rob, I get another view of your life.

You're like watching that old comedy skit go at it: "I know you are"
Glad you said your are". It's what happens when you are devoid of
originality, and most importantly--answers.

I wholeheartly agree when you say "My mind ... makes no sense".

How about the part where it says in direct referral: "My mind
operates several lelels higher than yours"

Once again I need to remind you this discussion is about your flat
earth system. I could care less how old you think I am. I'm very
comforatble with my age, since, to quote and old cliche, it's

better than the alternative.

Well, there's nothing wrong with that. But some people just don't
know what to do with themselves when they get a certain age. How's
exercise sound? What about leaving your make-believe world of
theoretical video poker on Skip Hughes' doorstep the next time you
see him? Those are positive expectations. Trying to match video poker
knowledge with someone like me is nothing but a negative expectation
endeavor.

One of the signs of your low intelligence is you only think in

black and white.

That sounds like another math term.

However, there are some "absolutes". For example, it is

absolutely true that your flat earth system cannot change a

negative game into a positive expectation.

This is why you're an absolute dufus. At least a thousand times I say
NO ONE EVER HAS THE EDGE OVER A CASINO. You don't need an adge to
walk out a winner nearly every time. You simply need to act and react
exactly the opposite of how the casino machine (manager) wants you
to.

> > > You dream, analyze, theorize, and make believe.
> > You're right on the first three. 3 out 4 ain't bad.
>
> #4 is compiled of the sum of the first 3. Figure that one out
> professor.

I think you'd better go back to the dictionary on that one. How can
you write something so stupid for everyone to see?

I'll leave it in there again, because it clearly identifies the
wannabee, make-believe world you live in.

draft dodger for Vietnam?

Wrong again. However, many of the veitnam draft dodgers were folks
with strong convictions and were basically proven to be right.

First, tell me the service you were in and what you did. Then, tell
me what your opinion of draft dodgers has to do with my question. Who
cares if they had strong convictions? A coward is a coward.

Is that what that was? I thought you were just a sick pervert.

A math geek that's allowed to think for himself?

Another peak into the window of your personality.

I take it back. Now you won't allow yourself to think....

And how does it do this? You have yet to explain this. Of course,

it doesn't, "pockets of good luck" happen to anyone who gambles and
has nothing to do with your system.

You've got a very thick skull, but I'll explain again: If you play
for 2 hours and get four deuces on FPDW, where are you? Up 250
credits? Maybe 100....or 500? Or maybe you're down 400. Unless you
immediately leave you will probably go home a loser anyway. I hit
four 2's after 2 hours and most likely I'm far ahead, over or far
over my goal, and out of there with a sizeable win. And when I return
to play again someday, I start at the lowest denomination once again.
That's the difference of what a pocket of good luck means to my play
strategy and what it means to a goofy math player.

Of ONE person. Just like a lottery winner.

I don't think you get it yet. What's a lottery winner? A one-time
wonder. If that's what you say I do then I'm a 1-time wonder over 200
times. You still think your assessment makes sense?

  
>
> No one, including you nerds who look funny, act funny, and think
> strangely,

Another glimpse into that window.

I like this one. Revenge of the Nerd!!

I thought you claimed you had an advantage. Was that all just

another lie? What a surprise ...

Your first mistake is in trying to think. That has little basis. The
advantage I have is leaving the casino a winner and NOT what you
calculate it out to be on your slide rule.

···

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

#129

else. Do your wins on a Tuesday count more than wins on Friday?

What's that got to do with what I said? Yes, a win on Tues. may count
more than another day because I may have set and won a higher goal
for a certain want out of Tuesday's play.

I notice you evaded the question on playing on Winpoker. Come on.
95,000 hands at home. What's the difference--a casino or at home???
On one you've got Bob Dancer telling you how stupid you are when you
make a mistake, and on the other he's laughing at you as you lose
your money. But aside from that, whay wouldn't you see if you could
get that bad streak out of the way, and then only go to the casino if
you did?

···

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

Please explain how ALL your previous gambling experience is anything

#130

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

wrote:

> I've seen a real tendency on your part to describe others with

you

> own shortcomings. Each time I read one of your rants it's

obviously

> just a reflection of your own psyche. Please, keep it up. It's a
> great window into your self-image.

OK, now show me EVIDENCE of that, Mr. Wizard! What you 'feel' as a
now useless old man with nothing to do doesn't qualify you as a
shrink....or does it?

Common knowledge. "He doth protest too much"

>
> Your window's wide open Rob, I get another view of your life.

You're like watching that old comedy skit go at it: "I know you

are"

Glad you said your are". It's what happens when you are devoid of
originality, and most importantly--answers.

The only missing answer is the proof your flat earth system works,
which you keep avoiding and attempting to change the subject.

>
> I wholeheartly agree when you say "My mind ... makes no sense".

How about the part where it says in direct referral: "My mind
operates several lelels higher than yours"

I believe your substance abused mind is often on a "much higher"
level, unfortunately drugs don't seem to help your posts one bit.

>
> Once again I need to remind you this discussion is about your

flat

> earth system. I could care less how old you think I am. I'm very
> comforatble with my age, since, to quote and old cliche, it's
better than the alternative.

Well, there's nothing wrong with that. But some people just don't
know what to do with themselves when they get a certain age. How's
exercise sound?

Always a good idea, though it doesn't do a thing to support your flat
earth system.

What about leaving your make-believe world of
theoretical video poker on Skip Hughes' doorstep the next time you
see him?

Never met him.

Those are positive expectations. Trying to match video poker
knowledge with someone like me is nothing but a negative

expectation

endeavor.

Yes, I do get a lot negative views from you. Once more, a window into
your self-image.

However, there are some "absolutes". For example, it is
> absolutely true that your flat earth system cannot change a
negative game into a positive expectation.

You don't need an adge to
walk out a winner nearly every time.

True, but that eventual loss in your progressive system is what the
casinos really love. It eats of all of the wins and more.

>
> > > > You dream, analyze, theorize, and make believe.
> > > You're right on the first three. 3 out 4 ain't bad.
> >
> > #4 is compiled of the sum of the first 3. Figure that one out
> > professor.
>
> I think you'd better go back to the dictionary on that one. How

can

> you write something so stupid for everyone to see?
>
I'll leave it in there again, because it clearly identifies the
wannabee, make-believe world you live in.

Fine with me if you want everyone to see what an idiot you are.

draft dodger for Vietnam?
>
> Wrong again. However, many of the veitnam draft dodgers were

folks

> with strong convictions and were basically proven to be right.

First, tell me the service you were in and what you did.

Still waiting for your real name before I disclose ANY personal info.

Then, tell
me what your opinion of draft dodgers has to do with my question.

Who

cares if they had strong convictions? A coward is a coward.

In many cases it took a lot of courage. But then you wouldn't have
any idea what that meant, would you?

> And how does it do this? You have yet to explain this. Of course,
it doesn't, "pockets of good luck" happen to anyone who gambles and
has nothing to do with your system.

You've got a very thick skull, but I'll explain again: If you play
for 2 hours and get four deuces on FPDW, where are you? Up 250
credits? Maybe 100....or 500? Or maybe you're down 400.

All those are possible. That's why they call it random.

Unless you
immediately leave you will probably go home a loser anyway. I hit
four 2's after 2 hours and most likely I'm far ahead, over or far
over my goal, and out of there with a sizeable win.

And then there's the time I had 4 ducks 10 times in 12 hours (triple
play NSUD progressives with RFs over 2x reset), where would I have
been if I'd have left after 2 hours?

And when I return
to play again someday, I start at the lowest denomination once

again.

That's the difference of what a pocket of good luck means to my

play

strategy and what it means to a goofy math player.

Please explain what magic occurs when you go home and come back
another day vs. continuing play on the same day? What changed in that
time frame to improve your odds of winning?

>
> Of ONE person. Just like a lottery winner.

I don't think you get it yet. What's a lottery winner? A one-time
wonder. If that's what you say I do then I'm a 1-time wonder over

200

times. You still think your assessment makes sense?

It has nothing to do with a one-time winner, it has everything to do
with a SINGLE example. Where's that MBA education you mentioned.
Every MBA knows a single sample (example) is worthless in statisical
analysis. Are you it wasn't a MBS instead of a MBA?

>
> I thought you claimed you had an advantage. Was that all just
another lie? What a surprise ...

Your first mistake is in trying to think. That has little basis.

The

advantage I have is leaving the casino a winner and NOT what you
calculate it out to be on your slide rule.

Robs' standard response #1.

You're still evading the subject of proof ...

···

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

#131

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

wrote:

>Please explain how ALL your previous gambling experience is

anything

else. Do your wins on a Tuesday count more than wins on Friday?

What's that got to do with what I said? Yes, a win on Tues. may

count

more than another day because I may have set and won a higher goal
for a certain want out of Tuesday's play.

The AMOUNT you win ... Do I have to spell out everything for you?

I notice you evaded the question on playing on Winpoker. Come on.
95,000 hands at home. What's the difference--a casino or at home???

Right now I don't use winpoker since it doesn't support OEJs. Oh, and
you can win or lose money at a casino and you don't playing winpoker.
That's one big difference.

whay wouldn't you see if you could
get that bad streak out of the way, and then only go to the casino
if you did?

Because in VP all hands are independent events. Past history means
nothing. Or, do you think a coin flip of a head makes a tail more
likely on the next flip?

···

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

#132

Common knowledge. "He doth protest too much"

Yup. If it's common, you're certainly not the #1 candidate to be
quoting it.

Never met him.

OK, to repeat one of your favorite idealism's---Prove it.

True, but that eventual loss in your progressive system is what the
casinos really love. It eats of all of the wins and more.

And you'll go on and on and on and say "But gee Rob, you're like the
1-in-a-million lottery winners out there--that's the only way my
blinded, geek-like mind can explain your continuing success".

Still waiting for your real name before I disclose ANY personal

info.

You mean you didn't ask the question on vpfree yet? At least a
thousand people know. Or are you waiting so you don't have to provide
any verifiable information here. Hmmmm....

In many cases it took a lot of courage. But then you wouldn't have
any idea what that meant, would you?

It's weasels like you who hide behind computers and do nothing that
compel me to wish I had some of you wimps there in the hot spots with
me.

And then there's the time I had 4 ducks 10 times in 12 hours

(triple play NSUD progressives with RFs over 2x reset), where would I
have been if I'd have left after 2 hours?

So what? And then there's the time I had 3 royals in 1 hour 35
minutes of total playing time in 3 different weeks, 2 of them on
dollars and one on $5. Of course, my overall profit was nearly
$30,000 because I didn't stay on and play on and on and on like a
moron.

Please explain what magic occurs when you go home and come back
another day vs. continuing play on the same day? What changed in

that time frame to improve your odds of winning?

You didn't understand it before, and you're only getting dumber as
time goes on.

It has nothing to do with a one-time winner, it has everything to

do with a SINGLE example. Where's that MBA education you mentioned.

Every MBA knows a single sample (example) is worthless in

statisical analysis. Are you it wasn't a MBS instead of a MBA?

You're the one claiming a lottery winner is a good example of me.
You're so weird.

You're still evading the subject of proof ...

As are you.

···

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

#133

The AMOUNT you win ... Do I have to spell out everything for you?

You're soooo thick, and if you didn't get it you never will.

> I notice you evaded the question on playing on Winpoker. Come on.
> 95,000 hands at home. What's the difference--a casino or at

home???

Right now I don't use winpoker since it doesn't support OEJs. Oh,

and

you can win or lose money at a casino and you don't playing

winpoker.

That's one big difference.

You evaded the question AGAIN.

Because in VP all hands are independent events. Past history means
nothing. Or, do you think a coin flip of a head makes a tail more
likely on the next flip?

And you evaded it AGAIN. Big surprise when cornered....as you've been
through most of this thread..

···

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

#134

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

wrote:

> Common knowledge. "He doth protest too much"

Yup. If it's common, you're certainly not the #1 candidate to be
quoting it.

You seem upset again. The truth has that way of affecting you.

>
> Never met him.

OK, to repeat one of your favorite idealism's---Prove it.

I only ask for proofs of statements that can be described
mathematically. E.G. VP systems. It is impossible to prove or
disprove meeting someone. I hope that's not too much for you to
comprehend.

>
> True, but that eventual loss in your progressive system is what

the

> casinos really love. It eats of all of the wins and more.

And you'll go on and on and on and say "But gee Rob, you're like

the

1-in-a-million lottery winners out there--that's the only way my
blinded, geek-like mind can explain your continuing success".

You still don't understand basic statistics, too bad you didn't learn
more getting your MBS.

>
> Still waiting for your real name before I disclose ANY personal
info.

You mean you didn't ask the question on vpfree yet? At least a
thousand people know. Or are you waiting so you don't have to

provide

any verifiable information here. Hmmmm....

I've given you the condition. It's up to you now.

>
> In many cases it took a lot of courage. But then you wouldn't

have

> any idea what that meant, would you?

It's weasels like you who hide behind computers and do nothing that
compel me to wish I had some of you wimps there in the hot spots

with

me.

Robs' standard response #4.

>
> And then there's the time I had 4 ducks 10 times in 12 hours
(triple play NSUD progressives with RFs over 2x reset), where would

I

have been if I'd have left after 2 hours?

So what? And then there's the time I had 3 royals in 1 hour 35
minutes of total playing time in 3 different weeks, 2 of them on
dollars and one on $5. Of course, my overall profit was nearly
$30,000 because I didn't stay on and play on and on and on like a
moron.

Or, you may have hit 5 Royals and lost $40,000 by not playing on.

>
> Please explain what magic occurs when you go home and come back
> another day vs. continuing play on the same day? What changed in
that time frame to improve your odds of winning?

You didn't understand it before, and you're only getting dumber as
time goes on.

Translated, this means there is no difference.

>
> It has nothing to do with a one-time winner, it has everything to
do with a SINGLE example. Where's that MBA education you mentioned.
> Every MBA knows a single sample (example) is worthless in
statisical analysis. Are you it wasn't a MBS instead of a MBA?

You're the one claiming a lottery winner is a good example of me.
You're so weird.

Now go up and reread the paragraph again, and if that doesn't help,
then there's little hope. But I'll try.

You are a sample of one for your flat earth system. A lottery winner
is a sample of one for the lottery. Neither is sufficient to draw any
statisical significance.

>
> You're still evading the subject of proof ...

As are you.

One more time. You are the one claiming your flat earth system can
turn a negative game into a positive expectation. The burden of proof
is on YOU. Reid's article prove's your system can't work and you've
shown nothing to counter his proof.

I have nothing to prove because I have not claimed any proven system
is invalid. You keep trying to turn this into a personal conflict to
avoid the fact you have no proof. Won't work.

···

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

#135

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

wrote:

> The AMOUNT you win ... Do I have to spell out everything for you?

You're soooo thick, and if you didn't get it you never will.

I get it, you didn't understand simple english and you won't admit it.

>
> > I notice you evaded the question on playing on Winpoker. Come

on.

> > 95,000 hands at home. What's the difference--a casino or at
home???
>
> Right now I don't use winpoker since it doesn't support OEJs. Oh,
and
> you can win or lose money at a casino and you don't playing
winpoker.
> That's one big difference.

You evaded the question AGAIN.

No, I answered it directly. Just not the answer you want.

> Because in VP all hands are independent events. Past history

means

> nothing. Or, do you think a coin flip of a head makes a tail more
> likely on the next flip?

And you evaded it AGAIN. Big surprise when cornered....as you've

been

through most of this thread..

Sorry Rob, but this dicussion is about your flat earth system and YOU
keep EVADING the topic. Where's your proof. Nowhere.

···

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

#136

You seem upset again. The truth has that way of affecting you.

I kind of think you may be a tad bit off the mark. I am the only
truth in video poker, and everyone knows it. Now who will agree
and/or admit to it may be an entirely different story. I think I just
might be able to live with that.

> >
I only ask for proofs of statements that can be described
mathematically. E.G. VP systems. It is impossible to prove or
disprove meeting someone. I hope that's not too much for you to
comprehend.

You ask for proof and/or evidence on everything I say--regardless of
the content. But when it comes time for YOU to prove something, you
run and hide just like the military coward you've always been.
Worried about that statement? Prove me wrong!

> > True, but that eventual loss in your progressive system is what
the casinos really love. It eats of all of the wins and more.

And what loss might that be? Be specific, Mr. Wizard. 'Eventual'
doesn't seem to be up to your standards, but you've been slipping a
lot lately.

>
I've given you the condition. It's up to you now.

You've been challenged, and so far you hide from it all. I don't
expect you'll ever go public, because you may get too embarrassed
with a picture, bio, or just about anything else.

> > In many cases it took a lot of courage. But then you wouldn't
have
> > any idea what that meant, would you?
>
> It's weasels like you who hide behind computers and do nothing

that

> compel me to wish I had some of you wimps there in the hot spots
with
> me.

Robs' standard response #4.

And I think I'll keep it in there since it bothers you so much.

Or, you may have hit 5 Royals and lost $40,000 by not playing on.

That's greed, and it has no place in my game. I can always wait until
the next trip to hit another, but after a $30k win, I'd never be able
to lose your $40k if you knew my strategy.

> > Please explain what magic occurs when you go home and come back
> > another day vs. continuing play on the same day? What changed

in

> that time frame to improve your odds of winning?
>
> You didn't understand it before, and you're only getting dumber

as

> time goes on.

Translated, this means there is no difference.

No, it means you're as dumb now as you were before.

You are a sample of one for your flat earth system. A lottery

winner is a sample of one for the lottery. Neither is sufficient to
draw any statisical significance.

Contradictory, but you thought I wouldn't notice, didn't you. I am
not 1 as you claim. My number of sessions is the number to look at.
Historical data far outweighs any theoretical expectation the math
geeks can come up with. If you were a winner you'd be talking about
your sessions and not some theory. Do a little bit better, please.

I have nothing to prove because I have not claimed any proven

system is invalid. You keep trying to turn this into a personal
conflict to avoid the fact you have no proof. Won't work.

It already has worked. You can't prove your system is valid except on
paper as played by a robot forever. So where does that lead you...

···

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

#137

> > you can win or lose money at a casino and you don't playing
> winpoker. That's one big difference.

And that matters when you can get 95,000 hands out of the way without
losing a dime? You're a joke, right?

>
> You evaded the question AGAIN.
No, I answered it directly. Just not the answer you want.

You're not answering the question because you don't know how to.

Because in VP all hands are independent events. Past history
means nothing.

Another avoidance of an answer. What you said is what everyone
including I say. The only problem is, you contradict yourself every
time you say it. On one hand you and your kind claim the "know"
they'll be OK in the 'long-run' because that's what theory says, but
in reality they know nothing at all about what will happen. On the
other hand you waffle over to a position that says every hand is
independent--which you get a A for. So which is it Einstein--will you
be OK tomorrow or not?

Sorry Rob, but this dicussion is about your flat earth system and

YOU keep EVADING the topic. Where's your proof. Nowhere.

Since your system came along first, where's YOUR proof? Or has it
gone Poof!

···

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

#138

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

wrote:

> You seem upset again. The truth has that way of affecting you.

I kind of think you may be a tad bit off the mark. I am the only
truth in video poker, and everyone knows it.

Then why have you been caught in so many lies in our discussion? And
this is one more to add to the ever growing list.

> > >
> I only ask for proofs of statements that can be described
> mathematically. E.G. VP systems. It is impossible to prove or
> disprove meeting someone. I hope that's not too much for you to
> comprehend.

You ask for proof and/or evidence on everything I say--regardless

of

the content.

All I want is a proof your flat earth system works. That's it. Come
on, where is it?

But when it comes time for YOU to prove something, you
run and hide just like the military coward you've always been.
Worried about that statement? Prove me wrong!

No, I'm not worried. It shows your TRUE personality, spreading lies
with no supporting evidence. It also is Robs' standard response #4.

>
> > > True, but that eventual loss in your progressive system is

what

> the casinos really love. It eats of all of the wins and more.

And what loss might that be? Be specific, Mr. Wizard. 'Eventual'
doesn't seem to be up to your standards, but you've been slipping a
lot lately.

Eventual says it all. I could get specific but then you'd turn around
with response #1 (math somehow takes a vacation when applied to your
flat earth system).

> >
> I've given you the condition. It's up to you now.
>
You've been challenged, and so far you hide from it all. I don't
expect you'll ever go public, because you may get too embarrassed
with a picture, bio, or just about anything else.

Nice try, just another attempt to evade my question. YOU'VE been
challenged and all you do is hide your head in the sand. What's your
real name and where's your proof.

> > > In many cases it took a lot of courage. But then you wouldn't
> have
> > > any idea what that meant, would you?
> >
> > It's weasels like you who hide behind computers and do nothing
that
> > compel me to wish I had some of you wimps there in the hot

spots

> with
> > me.
>
> Robs' standard response #4.

And I think I'll keep it in there since it bothers you so much.

Robs' standard response #5.

>
> Or, you may have hit 5 Royals and lost $40,000 by not playing on.
>
That's greed, and it has no place in my game. I can always wait

until

the next trip to hit another, but after a $30k win, I'd never be

able

to lose your $40k if you knew my strategy.

I knew you'd miss the point.

> > > Please explain what magic occurs when you go home and come

back

> > > another day vs. continuing play on the same day? What changed
in
> > that time frame to improve your odds of winning?
> >
> > You didn't understand it before, and you're only getting dumber
as
> > time goes on.
>
> Translated, this means there is no difference.

No, it means you're as dumb now as you were before.

Robs'standard response #4.

>
> You are a sample of one for your flat earth system. A lottery
winner is a sample of one for the lottery. Neither is sufficient to
draw any statisical significance.

Contradictory, but you thought I wouldn't notice, didn't you. I am
not 1 as you claim. My number of sessions is the number to look at.
Historical data far outweighs any theoretical expectation the math
geeks can come up with. If you were a winner you'd be talking about
your sessions and not some theory. Do a little bit better, please.

The number of sessions has nothing to do with it, Mr. MBS. If you
knew anything at all about statistics ... But, then we wouldn't be
having this discussion.

>
> I have nothing to prove because I have not claimed any proven
system is invalid. You keep trying to turn this into a personal
conflict to avoid the fact you have no proof. Won't work.

It already has worked. You can't prove your system is valid except

on

paper as played by a robot forever. So where does that lead you...

And on paper is where you'll need to prove you flat earth system
works if you want anybody to believe you. But then, it doesn't work
on paper does it? And, it won't work for the general public either.

···

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

#139

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

wrote:

> Sorry Rob, but this dicussion is about your flat earth system and
YOU keep EVADING the topic. Where's your proof. Nowhere.

Since your system came along first, where's YOUR proof? Or has it
gone Poof!

Standard statisics, Mr MBS. Or, is that too far over your head. Like
I've indicated before it's the same theory used by ALL of the fortune
500 companies in this country.

···

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

#140

> I kind of think you may be a tad bit off the mark. I am the only
> truth in video poker, and everyone knows it.
Then why have you been caught in so many lies in our discussion?

The implication of being 'caught' by you in a lie is similar to
hearing an explanation for one of Jean Scott's face-lifts.

All I want is a proof your flat earth system works. That's it. Come
on, where is it?

I believe you've firmly proven you don't have what it takes upstairs
to understand what I did and do. Just like you wouldn't be able to
comnprehend that I hit four Aces 4 times these pat 3 days using my
Advanced RTT Play Strategy, and that I won $4500 with it.

No, I'm not worried.

That's the first sign of a worried soul.

Eventual says it all.

Getting tired?

Nice try, just another attempt to evade my question. YOU'VE been
challenged and all you do is hide your head in the sand. What's

your real name and where's your proof.

Your system was 1st. So prove it and stop ducking it. Be a man and
stop acting like a woman would when asked for proof. If you don't,
then it's for certain you're in the Queen's Club of Losers!

> And I think I'll keep it in there since it bothers you so much.
Robs' standard response #5.

What, that you're a weasel?

And on paper is where you'll need to prove you flat earth system

works if you want anybody to believe you.

And I couldn't care less who believe's me--that's the point you keep
missing out on. I guess it can't sift thru that geek-head of yours.

>But then, it doesn't work on paper does it? And, it won't work for
the general public either.

Who cares if it works on PAPER? I'll take the money every time. It so
geekish of you to be worried about what you worry about all the time.
As I've said, imagine waking up next to you every day....or even once
a month!!

···

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