I'm almost always here Harry, ready to toss out the baloney
sandwiches being constantly served up in favor of something real that
you can sink your teeth into. Of course, for those who are compelled
to spend hour after hour inside casinos on a daily basis, I wouldn't
want to be a dog under their watch.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...>
wrote:
What ... you guys took the night off?
Guess ya gotta feed the dog sometime ...
- H.
Some guy named Brian has put up a Web site asking for sympathetic Web surfers to send him money for a much-needed Vegas vacation. You can check out this bizarre scheme at SendBrianToVegas.com.
Brad would do it for good luck. Follow the leader and listen to the Queen, lets make Brian an money making machine.
Send a buck via paypal and hit a $8,000 royal today!
----- Original Message -----
From: rgmustain
To: FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 9:55 PM
Subject: [FREEvpFREE] Re: The basics
I started this new thread (the basics), in an attempt to get away
from the flaming and unprovable assertions of the previous thread. I
intentionally did not mention advantage play. I could see two
possible results:
1) Rob would make a reasonable attempt to discuss the basics of VP
play.
2) Rob would attempt to turn this back into the previous thread with
more unproveable assertions and character denigration.
It's pretty clear the path Rob has chosen.
This also pretty much proves Rob has no interest in an intelligent
discussion of VP basics. Why would this be? This only logical reason
is he knows it will disclose his own techniques are flawed..
Therefore, I will provide some more evidence that's Rob's methods are
flawed and that even his own statements contradict one another.
1) RS states he wins on a regular basis without using advantage play
techniques.
2) RS states that no one can win in the long term even when the
payback of the game is greater than 100%.
Assume 1000's of people use the RS method and therefore win on a
regular basis. This group of people would certainly play millions of
hands, enough hands to qualify for the "long term". This group would
also win money. However, this contradicts 2), Rob has asserted many
times that no one can win in the "long term". Therefore, the original
premise must be flawed. The original premise in this case is that if
you use RS's method you will win on a regular basis..
Need more evidence. Since Rob asserts you can win even playing
negative games (I think he mentioned 6-5 bonus poker), this group of
RS followers could even be playing at an advantage on negative
payback games. Once again, since the group is playing enough hands to
qualify statistically for the long term, they are essentially turning
a negative game into a positive game. This is impossible.
Now, Rob will come along with his usual replies. Calling standard
mathematics hocus-pocus (or nonsense as he states below); stating how
he's proved his methods work because he says so (and he's a famous VP
writer); and, of course, everyone who disagrees with him is addicted
to gambling.
Dick
PS. Unless Rob at least attempts to say something intelligent in his
next reply, this will be my last post in this thread.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:
> > > Then I'm not sure if you even know why you're asking dumb
> questions about addition! For your very simplistic answer, 1+1=2
has
> nothing to do with video poker.
> >
> > So, your telling me the results of the first hand you play PLUS
the
> > results of the second hand you play DO NOT equal your current
> > win/loss position. This is equivalent to saying 1+1!=2. If you
> can't understand even this basic concept your IQ is in the lower 1%
> of the total population.
>
> That's like saying "the weight of the crap you took today plus the
> weight of the crap you will take tomorrow equals X--and that is
> simple addition". Big Deal! Must you make a math exam out of
> everything in life?
No, not at all, but neither will I hide from it like you do.
> You know, that's why I appear to know much more
> than you. I've experienced the world and its realities
Once again, Rob telling us how great he is.
> while you're
> content to run math models and wonder how and why after the
theories,
> probabilities and statistics. Thank you for giving me more material
> for another common-sense based article. You may be famous yet!
Rob, actually I'm not really a math guy at all. I pretty much never
think about it. I know just a enough about statistics and simple high
school math to know the truth when I see it. Nothing more is required
to see through your scams.
> >
> > > Again your math and the spin you put on it is a
> > > feel-good position addicts take in order to justify to everyone
> > else
> > > why they can't stop playing.
> >
> > Once again Rob brings up addiction. Whenever I see this I know
you
> > are panicing. Keep saying it Rob, it's just nonsense. I would
> suggest you go back to you psychiatrist friend and ask what he
thinks
> about you bringing up the same thing over and over again.
>
> I did. He sais if there's reason, it's proper. It's the person in
> denial that responds that need take a good, long look in the
mirror.
Then, I suggest you find a mirror.
> >
> > Nope, just you and me in this discussion Rob. You're trying to
> weasel your way out of it but it won't work.
>
> I probably have a lot more time than you, even though you waste
your
> life away in casinos. So who is it that's weaseling out?
Been to a casino once in the last 10 days. Not exactly wasting my
life away is it. If anything both of us are wasting our lives away in
front of a computer.
> >
> > Let's see, Robs' saying it's a scam to say your overall results
are
> > the sum of the individual hands that you play. Do you look insane
> or what?
>
> Yes I do--to you. And how important is THAT?
Well, at least you finally admit it.
> >
> > This players' results fits in perfectly with what I have been
> saying. His overall results were the sum of the individual hands he
> played. In this case he had good results. Please tell me how his
> being killed in a car accident has anything to do with VP!
>
> You missed it again, Dick.
Don't think so, your statement was attempting to indicate if someone
dies then how can they ever reach long term. However, I'm simply
trying to get agreement on the basics of VP. Your attempt to change
the subject was obvious.
> >
> > When did you get that engineering degree you're so proud of?
Slide
> > rules haven't been around for decades. First came calculators and
> now we have computers to do the work for us. You appear to be in
the
> dark ages about anything technical. It's no longer the '60s Rob,
wake
> up.
>
> Um, I think I was mocking you....you know, like when I asked how
many
> pens you can fit into your shirt-pocket holder? Maybe you're not
> trying, but you sure come across as a closed-minded math geek from
> the 50's.
The slide rule mocking is about as childish as it gets. Of course,
you must not have realized it makes you look like someone who's never
got past his grade school development.
> >
> > Your reported results mean nothing since you can't prove them.
Your
> > attempts to talk your around this are preposterous. Get over it.
>
> And you know what's even more satisfying that ruffling your
feathers?
> Counting the money you don't think I have from video poker.
One, two, uh one, two, uh one, uh, where's the beer ...
> >
> > Actually this is pretty simple. You have an even game and you
> either win or lose. Is that too complicated? Doesn't even require a
> book since I just laid it all out for you in 3-4 lines.Once again,
> Rob chooses to run away from the obvious since he knows this will
> expose his scam.
>
> You believe everything's a scam if you didn't come up with it. I
> believe I spot just a tad bit of jealousy.
Nothing here new to the world. I certainly didn't come up with basic
math. Probably someone in 15th century. Looks like your spotters out
of whack.
> >
> > > Who cares what one of your books says??
> > Anyone who wants to be successful at VP instead of scamming
others.
>
> I want to ask for substantiation of that statement, but I don't
want
> to see a barrage of mathematical nonsense instead of a common sense
> answer again.
Rob, once again states math is nonsense. Let's get back to flat earth
concept of yours again ...
vpFREE Links: http://tinyurl.com/v9qq
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
FREEvpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Can't speak for the others but Rastis has been feeding the "cat"
----- Original Message -----
From: Harry Porter
To: FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 6:19 AM
Subject: [FREEvpFREE] Re: The basics
What ... you guys took the night off?
Guess ya gotta feed the dog sometime ...
- H.
vpFREE Links: http://tinyurl.com/v9qq
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
FREEvpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Are you sure this fellow isn't the Queen's son? Or maybe he's really
related to that Yuri-the-math/former-vp-expert-turned-loser guy. In
this case, either way you roll the dice you can't lose as you give to
the very needy.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Rasti$ P. Rulz" <vpvegas@c...>
wrote:
Some guy named Brian has put up a Web site asking for sympathetic
Web surfers to send him money for a much-needed Vegas vacation. You
can check out this bizarre scheme at SendBrianToVegas.com.
Brad would do it for good luck. Follow the leader and listen to
the Queen, lets make Brian an money making machine.
Send a buck via paypal and hit a $8,000 royal today!
From: rgmustain
To: FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 9:55 PM
Subject: [FREEvpFREE] Re: The basicsI started this new thread (the basics), in an attempt to get away
from the flaming and unprovable assertions of the previous
thread. I
intentionally did not mention advantage play. I could see two
possible results:1) Rob would make a reasonable attempt to discuss the basics of
VP
play.
2) Rob would attempt to turn this back into the previous thread
with
more unproveable assertions and character denigration.
It's pretty clear the path Rob has chosen.
This also pretty much proves Rob has no interest in an
intelligent
discussion of VP basics. Why would this be? This only logical
reason
is he knows it will disclose his own techniques are flawed..
Therefore, I will provide some more evidence that's Rob's methods
are
flawed and that even his own statements contradict one another.
1) RS states he wins on a regular basis without using advantage
play
techniques.
2) RS states that no one can win in the long term even when the
payback of the game is greater than 100%.Assume 1000's of people use the RS method and therefore win on a
regular basis. This group of people would certainly play millions
of
hands, enough hands to qualify for the "long term". This group
would
also win money. However, this contradicts 2), Rob has asserted
many
times that no one can win in the "long term". Therefore, the
original
premise must be flawed. The original premise in this case is that
if
you use RS's method you will win on a regular basis..
Need more evidence. Since Rob asserts you can win even playing
negative games (I think he mentioned 6-5 bonus poker), this group
of
RS followers could even be playing at an advantage on negative
payback games. Once again, since the group is playing enough
hands to
qualify statistically for the long term, they are essentially
turning
a negative game into a positive game. This is impossible.
Now, Rob will come along with his usual replies. Calling standard
mathematics hocus-pocus (or nonsense as he states below); stating
how
he's proved his methods work because he says so (and he's a
famous VP
writer); and, of course, everyone who disagrees with him is
addicted
to gambling.
Dick
PS. Unless Rob at least attempts to say something intelligent in
his
next reply, this will be my last post in this thread.
> > > Then I'm not sure if you even know why you're asking dumb
> questions about addition! For your very simplistic answer,
1+1=2
has
> nothing to do with video poker.
> >
> > So, your telling me the results of the first hand you play
PLUS
the
> > results of the second hand you play DO NOT equal your current
> > win/loss position. This is equivalent to saying 1+1!=2. If
you
> can't understand even this basic concept your IQ is in the
lower 1%
> of the total population.
>
> That's like saying "the weight of the crap you took today plus
the
> weight of the crap you will take tomorrow equals X--and that is
> simple addition". Big Deal! Must you make a math exam out of
> everything in life?No, not at all, but neither will I hide from it like you do.
> You know, that's why I appear to know much more
> than you. I've experienced the world and its realitiesOnce again, Rob telling us how great he is.
> while you're
> content to run math models and wonder how and why after the
theories,
> probabilities and statistics. Thank you for giving me more
material
> for another common-sense based article. You may be famous yet!
Rob, actually I'm not really a math guy at all. I pretty much
never
think about it. I know just a enough about statistics and simple
high
school math to know the truth when I see it. Nothing more is
required
to see through your scams.
> >
> > > Again your math and the spin you put on it is a
> > > feel-good position addicts take in order to justify to
everyone
> > else
> > > why they can't stop playing.
> >
> > Once again Rob brings up addiction. Whenever I see this I
know
you
> > are panicing. Keep saying it Rob, it's just nonsense. I would
> suggest you go back to you psychiatrist friend and ask what he
thinks
> about you bringing up the same thing over and over again.
>
> I did. He sais if there's reason, it's proper. It's the person
in
> denial that responds that need take a good, long look in the
mirror.Then, I suggest you find a mirror.
> >
> > Nope, just you and me in this discussion Rob. You're trying
to
> weasel your way out of it but it won't work.
>
> I probably have a lot more time than you, even though you waste
your
> life away in casinos. So who is it that's weaseling out?Been to a casino once in the last 10 days. Not exactly wasting my
life away is it. If anything both of us are wasting our lives
away in
front of a computer.
> >
> > Let's see, Robs' saying it's a scam to say your overall
results
are
> > the sum of the individual hands that you play. Do you look
insane
> or what?
>
> Yes I do--to you. And how important is THAT?Well, at least you finally admit it.
> >
> > This players' results fits in perfectly with what I have been
> saying. His overall results were the sum of the individual
hands he
> played. In this case he had good results. Please tell me how
his
> being killed in a car accident has anything to do with VP!
>
> You missed it again, Dick.Don't think so, your statement was attempting to indicate if
someone
dies then how can they ever reach long term. However, I'm simply
trying to get agreement on the basics of VP. Your attempt to
change
the subject was obvious.
> >
> > When did you get that engineering degree you're so proud of?
Slide
> > rules haven't been around for decades. First came calculators
and
> now we have computers to do the work for us. You appear to be
in
the
> dark ages about anything technical. It's no longer the '60s
Rob,
wake
> up.
>
> Um, I think I was mocking you....you know, like when I asked
how
many
> pens you can fit into your shirt-pocket holder? Maybe you're
not
> trying, but you sure come across as a closed-minded math geek
from
> the 50's.
The slide rule mocking is about as childish as it gets. Of
course,
you must not have realized it makes you look like someone who's
never
got past his grade school development.
> >
> > Your reported results mean nothing since you can't prove
them.
Your
> > attempts to talk your around this are preposterous. Get over
it.
>
> And you know what's even more satisfying that ruffling your
feathers?
> Counting the money you don't think I have from video poker.One, two, uh one, two, uh one, uh, where's the beer ...
> >
> > Actually this is pretty simple. You have an even game and you
> either win or lose. Is that too complicated? Doesn't even
require a
> book since I just laid it all out for you in 3-4 lines.Once
again,
> Rob chooses to run away from the obvious since he knows this
will
> expose his scam.
>
> You believe everything's a scam if you didn't come up with it.
I
> believe I spot just a tad bit of jealousy.
Nothing here new to the world. I certainly didn't come up with
basic
math. Probably someone in 15th century. Looks like your spotters
out
of whack.
> >
> > > Who cares what one of your books says??
> > Anyone who wants to be successful at VP instead of scamming
others.
>
> I want to ask for substantiation of that statement, but I don't
want
> to see a barrage of mathematical nonsense instead of a common
sense
> answer again.
Rob, once again states math is nonsense. Let's get back to flat
earth
----- Original Message -----
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deadin7" <deadin7@y...> wrote:
concept of yours again ...vpFREE Links: http://tinyurl.com/v9qq
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
--------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
FREEvpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I know you all have got to be tired of reading a few words of, for
example, Bob Dancer's
articles, and moving on as soon as you see things like "WJQK"
or "T986", etc.
etc. on and on. Makes for interesting reading, doesn't it?? Pretty
soon we'll
see these 'gurus' laminating their own articles and selling them so
people can
take them into the casinos with them, because there's no way anyone
will ever
remember all that nonsense once they start playing.
Well, it's 'Thank goodness for Rob Singer' time again. If you go to
my site and
read the most recent Gaming Today article, you'll feel refreshed as a
cool
summer evening by the time you're done. It's title "The God Of
Comps....How To
REALLY Get It Done" is interesting enough. The rest is worth it's
weight in a
garage full of comps!