The Secret Behind vpFREE

[rgmustain]

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

> > > > Face it, little dicky. He doesn't want to have a back and
forth
> > > with illogic because he has better things to do--like work.
> >
> > > I think that's up for him to decide.
> >
> > Yup, and the neurotic in you didn't listen.
>
> He did respond. I guess that pretty much negates Rob's comment.

All except for the fact that the neurotic in you didn't
listen....and the wee fact that he told you how tiresome you've
become.....

If he answers a post then he invites a response. Do I have to explain
to you how public forums work ... again? It's only been a few days
since the last time.

> > Maybe the problem lies in your intelligence level. Maybe you
just don't have what he & I have when it comes to recognizing

cycles

at the machines!
>
> Or, maybe there aren't any and neither one of you understand
> randomness.

Yup--you just confirmed the reason---It's your intelligence level
that's the culprit here.

OK, please explain what random means.

> > And when my suspicions were verified by the SW engineer
> > at IGT, the smartest among us listened to me.

> Give us his name. What? No name ... again? This "inside info" con
is getting very tiring.

I'll tell you what. I'll SELL you his name, number and even his

home

address. $10,000.

Did I mention it was a con ... Proof positive.

C'mon little dicky. Put up or look stupider.
Imagine how all your fears will be met head-on when you talk to

this

guy--and he makes mincemeat out of you to the tune of how I do it??

Do others fall for this obvious con? You must hang around with real
morons. If you had a name you'd have wriiten it in all caps. So, "Put
up or look stupider."

> > > > I've told you, and yet you still cling to your nonsense

even

> > > > when you know the reply is based on the aforementioned!

Does

> this news make you THAT upset?
> >
> > > Not in the least.
> >
> > Denial, with prejudice.
>
> Asserted lie.

Assereted denial.

LMAO.

> > >Of course, it's easy to see that you would jump on this like a
fly
> > on .... I heard many claims of how to win at VP. I'm still
looking
> > for one that's verifiable.
> >
> > Well, lets start at the top and with the truth.
>
> We already know that the truth and little Robbie are complete
> strangers.

Asserted BS. Prove it with some 'dicky facts'!

Already done many times over. Do I have to mention "golf balls"?

> > That simply confirms
> > what I've been saying all along--you and Dancer and the rest of
the make-believe artists don't win a thing.
>
> Asserted lie. I win. Is this RIV pointing out that Rob has been
lying to us all along?

You're a big loser and you know it.

Asserted lie. But, still indicative that Rob has been lying all along
about his results.

You all use the same tricks that
I've exposed over and over again as new generations of players
arrive.

Telling the truth? Yup, that's the trick I use.

Play $2million of coin thru at a theoretical 1.2% 'edge',
lose $55,000....but lo and behold, you can tell the world that
you've WON a sweet $24,000 because that's what the numbers say you
should have won with that 'edge'.

Is this supposed to be your personal results. Sounds reasonable
except for the missing minus sign (-1.2%).

You can even throw a few thousand
in there because you played 'tournaments'...and lost them too. It's
like a bunch of clowns being ripped a new one by me week after week
after week.

Yup. I can hear the moans ... wait, I didn't hear any. Could this be
another lie? Well, of course it is. Rob couldn't go down without
throwing in a few idiotic assertions.

> > > How can you tell a machine is hot? In my analogy, why

wouldn't

> > > you say the golf clubs were "hot"? I think this is important.
If there is a way to determine this then casinos should be easy to
beat.
> >
> > > > HELLO!? DISCOVER AMERICA??!! He already TOLD you how,
Einstein!
> > >
> > > I see, if you see a seven come up in two hands in a row, then
you should hold the sevens over 77AAA. Is that what you want
everyone to do?
> >
> > First, he didn't say that. Read his post again and become
readily educated even if you try and reject it out of
dumbfoundedness---again.
>
> He provided no definable process.

So the geek in you figures "I'll just make it all up!"

What choice did he leave? He provided nothing usable. Or, is this the
part where we're all supposed to be mind readers?

To say he wins because of some
> nebulous claim of detecting patterns is about the same as

claiming

> hitting the hold button a few times increases wins. Actually, the
> latter is a definable and testable process. It's worth more.

Um....not a good effort there, little dicky. You don't understand

it

and obviously don't have his talent. Save your dignity and just
admit it.

Robbie can't refute my logic once again. RIV steps in and tells us
why.

> The only thing I've seen so far is an unverifiable claim. Even
Bob isn't sure he hasn't simply been lucky.

Then it all went right thru that big ol' hole in your head again.

He

says he's been lucky, and even luckier when he applies his pattern-
detection skills. but that hurts you, doesn't it.

Doesn't have any effect on me. Not being able to define these
arbitrary "pattern-detection skills" makes them worthless and leaves
you alone with your own unverifiable claims and your con.

···

> > So how in the world do you expect anyone to lay it out for you--

-

>
> Simple. Write down the process.

That's funny.....I've already read what he wrote and I understand
it. Now where'd you say you went to school?

OK, you write down the process.

> > with
> > the Queen doing a strip-tease at one end and Paymar counting
sheep at the other? Nothing's verifiable to you FOR REAL. All you
know is theory, and this ain't about that.

> It's about a claimed method for forecasting future hands on a VP
> machine. You and Bob claim this capability, but provide no way to
> substantiate your claims.

Sorry for embarrassing you AGAIN, Einstein....but my way and his

way

of substantiating our claims is by how much we've won.

Meaningless. If you haven't kept track of all your special plays then
we have no way of determining how much they've helped (or hurt) your
overall results.

Not good
enough for the geek? Then write down EXACTLY your rendition of
detailed 'substantiation' would be.

Already done.

And while you're at it, prove to
us that you 'win' with your nerd method by providing verifiable
substantiation that it has indeed happened as you claim it has.

Then

I'll do the same and I'm sure Bob will too!

Sorry, moron, but this has been covered ad nausium. No individual
results are meaningful. It's like saying one at bat by a baseball
player constitutes proof of his skill. However, if you think it's so
important then provide us with the PROOF that you have won. PS,
anyone who wants to see my bank statments is more than welcome.

For all we know Bob is psychic( and
> doesn't realize this is the reason for his turn around. Of

course,

> this would be worthless to anyone else.

What you do know is that I'M psychic. I can see right through you
all the time.

Is that why you make yourself look foolish so often? It must be
that "gofer goof ball" in you that does it.

> > > Of course it matters. The fewer the hands, the more likely it
is
> to
> > > see short term fluctuations. You remember my 26 RFs. That was
> also
> > a short term fluctuation even though it was over 500K hands. I
> didn't
> > > need to invent special plays, it's all part of normal
randomness.
> >
> > You'd analyze my morning dump trying to make it fit you're

chart

or whatever waste-of-time exercize you're into at the moment.

> Which ear was that again?

Probably the one you sport that's loaded with wax.

I "sport" one of your ears? Interesting. Have I mentioned
communication skills before?

> > Remember
> > how I was told my $20k on $25 DDB really COST me X amount? Even
> > Elliott Shapiro chastised me after winning the $100k royal for
> using
> > a special play to hit it. He told me that 'stupid play' cost me
> over
> > $125! Just call me stupid!!
>
> You're stupid.

And there you have it! Little dicky calling someone stupid for
winning,

No, I called you stupid because it's true. You prove it every time
you post.

lets see.....$99,875 (no tip of course) when in reality, he
calculates it out to a $125 loss. Go ahead. Call me stupid one more
time, because now that you have a dozen eggs on your face, you
certainly don't have any other words to chime in with on THIS one!

If you think being lucky constitutes intelligence, then you are far
more stupid than I can put into words. There's very little difference
between you and the hold tappers. Let's hear how smart those lastest
Power Ball winners were. Explain why they were smart and the other
millions of players were stupid.

> However, they have a definable process. That puts them one up on
you and Bob.

Did you really pass 4th grade reading? Really?? Read my strategy
again,

We're talking about special plays and I wouldn't waste my time
reading yours. Is that 4th grade reading comprehension you're
displaying?

then read Bob's post one more time. Then you have permission
to take a cold shower.

Why? It still provides no information. Do you think "unorthodox"
conveys any usable information? Is your brain permanently damaged?

> > > > > What happens between the last hand you play in one

session

> and
> > > the first hand you play in the next?
> >
> > > > Time passes, genius.
> > >
> > > Exactly, and thanks for the compliment. I couldn't have said
it
> > > better myself. Now what happens between two hands played the
same
> > day?
> >
> > Time passes, Mr. Wizard.
>
> Thanks again, EXACTLY my point. There is no difference.
>
> > And i'm not sure how Bob handles this (but I
> > have a good guess) but in my strategy the time lapse between
> quitting
> > with a win goal and coming back for the next session also means
a
> > lower denomination and playing a different machine and maybe a
> lower
> > volatility game--one that also may be in a hot cycle. It's all
> within
> > the bounds of common sense.
>
> So, you finally admit that simply changing machines has the same
> effect as going home. What happened to your previous claim that
you should go home?

I thought you read my strategies....man, you really didn't!

I've told you many times I haven't read your strategies. Did the part
about wasting my time escape you? Didn't I mention Reid's proof, that
no progression can effect the payback of game, enough times? Is your
brain damaged? I based my sim on your explanation in this forum.

What
kind of a fact-collector are you??

I'm not a "fact-collector", I'm a con exposer. By the way, if you had
any facts you would have posted them long ago. Their absence proves
you have nothing.

> > > > Now you don't believe something about your precious coin-
> > flipping! Get over it.
> > >
> > > You forget, I know exactly how PRNGs work. One seed could put
you
> > in
> > > the position where a specific set of numbers flow for tails
and
> > > another seed could put you the same position for heads. The
> results
> > > would be mirror images of each other. Once again, it appears
you
> > WANT to look foolish.
> >
> > So now Bob's a liar too--only you're refraining from calling

him

> > that??
>
> I assume he either misread or misinterpreted or, another very
likely situation, the writer was confused. We've certainly seen

that

in most of Rob's writings.

Of course he was confused, little dicky.....of COURSE he was! No

one

could ever POSSIBLY have more insight and knowledge than our own
little dicky.....

Not in this area. They might have equivalent knowledge, but not more.
Computers are really simple tools. They do what they are programmed
to do. To make a statement like Bob did is nonsense to even a novice
programmer. And, I already explained exactly how mirror results could
occur. You're being foolish again, little man.

> > Is everyone supposed to be stupid and ignorant without
> > knowledge of anything pertinent except you?

> In this case, it appears so. I know what I'm talking about and
could write a coin-flip simulator in less that a day myself. All it
would take is deleting a lot of code from my VP simulator.

You apparently don't know as much as you think you do. Bob wouldn't
lie about that because he has no reason to.

Like I said, there are several possible reasons for his confusion,
lying is your game.

I make you look small
enough by firing a truth barrage at you every day. Accept the fact
that you were one-upped this time,

OK, tell you what. I'll bet you $10,000 that I can produce a program
that correctly simulates a coin toss using a standard PRNG and
produces results favoring either heads and tails. You can have
anybody you want check the code and I will change it if they find a
problem. How about it? ... Now, you know how it really feels to
be "one-upped".

go in the corner and give it a
good cry, call your mommy and maybe she'll listen to you, then come
back and face the world like a man.

RIV.

> > > No, I was trying to see if he could specify HOW he improves
his
> > > results. If he can't then his approach is no better than
hitting
> > hold button several times before the draw button.
> >
> > He just told you....AGAIN. He 'discerns' short-term patterns.
Some people just may have that ability--even if you don't.
>
> If "some people" have this ability then why can't they explain it?

I explained mine and he explained his.

No, you have provided no repeatable process. You only claim it like a
typical con man. Put up or shut up.

What more do you want--us to
act like geeks at the machines and record evey hand and card
occurrence?

It has nothing to do with recording results. Your brain is damaged,
isn't it? ... All you have to write down the steps that you follow in
recognizing the "pattern" and then define how that effects your
future plays.

>
> > > > > If you can't explain it then it is worthless.
> >
> > > > Pointless. You'll reject it either way. Just admit it.
> > >
> > > No, if he can explain how he does it then his process can be
> tested and verified, if not, it is worthless to anyone else.
> >
> > Why does it have to be 'tested and verified' by anyone else if
he already has had it working for him for 6 years/12 trips?
>
> Why bother posting it if you can't explain it to anyone else?

I saw his explanation. I accept it. What's YOUR problem???

No problem, just write down the process. What's taking you so long?

>
> > And just how
> > does one go about 'testing and verifying' what he says he does
> anyway?
>
> Simple. Get a group of people to try it and report their results.
I'm willing to try it at low denoms. All I need is the process.

HAHAHAHAHA!! You mean like in a gang-bang video poker marathon?
Here's your process: put the money in, play the hands, and if you
have the talent to detect patterns then you will. Very simple.

This is all I wanted you to admit. You have no process. You can't
explain it to anyone. Typical con man BS. We've seen it all before.

Robbie: Go ahead and detect the patterns.
Student: How do I do that?
Robbie: Uh, just do it like I said.
Student: You didn't say anything.
Robbie: Boy are you stupid. I guess some students can't be taught.

>
> > I know he plays A LOT when he's in town, so I'd say he knows
what
> > he's talking about. I trust his word--why can't you?
>
> I believe he has won. I question whether his special plays have
had anything to do with it. A more likely explanation is that he

has

been on the good side of the bell curve.

And for good reason....those special plays that he already

explained.

Or, as in the actual case ... he didn't explain.

> > > Sounds like your results over the last 6 years have been

based

on
> a
> > small number of hands. Haven't you considered the possibility
> > > that you have been lucky? Once again, the math predicts that
some
> > > > results will show up on the right side of the bell curve.
> >
> > > > Here we go with him comfort blanky BS again.
> >
> > > Just the facts, as usual.
> >
> > Looks like a question and a couple of confidence-building
> statements
> > to me. Your armor has been weakened and now you're waving the
white
> > flag hoping not to get stoned.
>
> Asserted lie. All I'm asking for is a a process.

I just gave you the process.

I think we've covered this enough. You have provided zippo. Everyone
can clearly see this now.

now I suggest you go repair those kinks
in your severly weakened armor before you just blow away.

RIV.

> > you can hide behind your theories
> > as 'facts' as much as you like, but they've never protected you
> from the truth.
>
> RIV. Let me take a second to explain this to CF. This acronym
means you should reread what Rob has just written and understand
that the words he uses are his inner self's way of describing Rob

to

the rest of us. I don't think you want me explain this every time.

Too bad little dicky. Whenever you go into that tirade all you're
doing is slapping the "I am a sap" sticker on your forehead for all
the world to see.

I see, now your speaking for both Bob and CF. I wonder how they like
that? Hey guys, don't bother posting any more. Rob has read your
minds and will take over from here.

You have yet to find a way to protect you from the
undeniable truth. I wish I could say I feel your pain....but you so
deservedly get the whole enchilada every time you ask for it.

RIV.

>
> > > > I kinda think it is YOU who don't believe anyone else.....
> >
> > > Coming from the man who claims ALL APers lose ... I was

simply

> > > pointing out the contradiction in his statements.
> >
> > And you know I'm right.
>
> Asserted lie. I win. Is this really RIV commenting on Rob?

You're a loser and a sore one at that.

My fingers are a little sore from bowling yesterday, that's about it.
My bank account is still ++++++. Still want to see my deposit slips?

why else would you get so
riled up over someone else who says they win?

Asserted lie. So far, Robbie appears to be the only one "riled" up.
Is that because he can't provide a process? Could be.

Envy....jealousy....and it's all because you only walk away year
after year with phantom bucks.

RIV.

>
> > In fact, he USED to play like you just like I
> > did, and where did it get HIM? There's your answer, and also

why

> it's
> > YOU who won't believe anyone else.
>
> He played DB and PKM at even odds and JOB which is negative. It's
not
> surprising he has had the exact short term fluctuations that he
> indicated. No special plays required. My own personal results
reflect
> this possiblity.

Translation: little dicky is trying to be one of the boys....

I guess the truth is discouraged by Rob.

I've mentioned it before. I started out my AP play
> with a long losing streak (over 200K hands). Lost over $6K at .25
> play. What if I would have decided at that time to modify my
approach
> and incorporate some special plays? I might have been convinced
these
> were the reasons for my new success. However, I became successful
> without doing this. Understanding short term fluctuations is all
it takes.

....but now he goes right back into his comfy blankey again.

Just the facts, as usual. Logic gets these replies every time.

> > > > > I've won every year but one since I been keeping

records.

> > > > > Interestingly, the polls track very nicely with
mathematical projections.
> >
> > > > Now we get back into the required bragging part of what

it's

> like to be a compulsive gambler who loses more than he wins.
> >
> > > Asserted lie. Did I mention you claim ALL APers lose?

If you did, you should heed the words of truth.

That's all I do, which demonstrates you constantly lie.

> >
> > Try to be wishy-washy....try to be vague or change the issue.
> Either way you cut it, losers are always quick to point out how
> they 'win'. And the ones who do offend repeatedly are the ones
with the worst gambling problems.
>
> I do believe RIV has just explained that ROB is a loser.

Sounds like you twisted your tongue on that one. Wanna try it

again??

Nope, everyone else can read.

>
> >
> > > > > Are you evidence of this human nature? It seems you have
no
> > > problem making the same claims you also disregard. You'll

note

I
> > never say that people playing other ways can't win. The math
> predicts
> > some will.
> >
> > > > What's noted is your envy of anyone who says they win.
> >
> > > Asserted lie.
> >
> > Asserted in B&W--"you have tremendous envy".
>
> > You're lucky. you've got the truth coming at you here from all
> around!
>
> Let me get this straight. You and Bob constitute "all around"?
While
> the 6000 or so members of VPfree constitute what? LMAO. PS.
> teacuplily has already admitted he loses with your system. He

just

> blames the casinos in AC instead of accepting the truth.

It's written all over you. the only words you hear are from those

of

us whom you want to emulate.
Teacup said what?

Teacuplilly complained that he always loses in AC. He uses your
system. He claims the machines are gaffed. You supported him. Need I
say more?

>
> > > > >We have a tendency to dismiss that we are simply lucky (or
> > > unlucky) and look for other explanations.
> >
> > > > Read this one more time: EVERY WINNING VP HAND IS THE

DIRECT

> AND TOTAL RESULT OF BEING LUCKY.
> >
> > > Asserted Lie. If this was true, you should never need to hold
any
> > > cards. Just keep hitting deal/draw until LUCK comes your way.
Is
> > that the approach you want everyone to take?
> >
> > Are you nuts?
>
> I just took what you said to it's logical conclusion. I do agree
with your description of your statement.
>
> > You get dealt a loser, you draw a winner and you're
> > lucky. You get dealt a winner and you're lucky--but improve

upon

it
> > and you're even luckier. You get a loser at the end of any hand
and
> > you're unlucky. That's all there is to it. You goofheads try to
> make
> > it out to be something it's not.
>
> Then you are saying that skill is involved. You can't have it

both

> ways. It can't be ALL LUCK, while admitting that decisions must

be

> made. You've gotten yourself into what is called a catch-22.

Here's the same flash you get every day: A winning hand is nothing
but good luck, and a losing hand is nothing but bad luck. no skill
involved.

Then just keep hitting deal/draw. No sense holding any cards if it's
all luck. No sense in ANY special plays. Do you even have a clue how
idiotic you sound?

You go into vp with a basic understanding of common sense
and you let the cards fall. The choice of what to hold is not a
decision--but common sense and nothing more. A monkey could be
trained to do it just as well as you.

Common sense? If it is so common then why haven't the casinos all
gone out of business? And, once again, why would it matter what you
hold if the results are pure luck anyway?

>
> >
> > > > Now repeat it 500 times and MAYBE you'll
> > > > understand the game.
> >
> > > Not necessary to repeat your lies and please tell us again
about
> > > the "Rob Singer slot machine approach to VP". ROTFLMAO.
> >
> > No need to. Re-read Bob's post and you'll get a good idea on

how

to
> > win. then maybe you will too
>
> Asserted lie. As you already know, I win.

How much you selling those comfy blankeys for---or does the price
rise after every losing session??!

I don't sell anything. That's why I'm believable and you're not. I
have nothing to gain or lose while your job, your books, your life is
based on a lie. Admit the lie and you're back on the streets. I
understand WHY you run your con, it's still not right.

[rgmustain]

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

> > > > > No, I meant what I said. The analogy comparison was hot
golf
> > > > > clubs vs. a hot machine. You even cut out that part of my
> post.
> > > > That clearly points out you either commented without fully
> > reading
> > > or
> > > > > > just didn't get it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Either way you try to wiggle out of your quiksand,
the 'hot
> > > golf clubs' is what brought you down on this one.
> > > > >
> > > > > Asserted lie. You said it was a "golf ball" which I never
> > > > mentioned. Kind of hard to escape your own words. Did I
mention
> > LIE.
> >
> > > > When a goof'ball' like you mentions golf 'clubs' it's the
same
> as
> > > > saying 'balls'.
> >
> > > Does anyone sense a LIE coming on ...
> >
> > Only when you rattle them out.....
>
> As is the case here where Rob tried to lie and say my analogy was
> about "golf balls". It appears he's still rattled.

Wordy explanations again as you try to babble your way out.
Sorry.....

Yes, I bet you are sorry. Interestingly, I used around the same
number of words and you claimed I was "at a loss for words". Do I
detect a little scrambling by Robbie?

>
> >
> > > > Will you ever realize that's how the rest of the
> > > > normal world sees between the hillbilly-type nonsense you
write?
> >
> > > Sorry, I can't "realize" your lies. You were caught in a red-
> handed
> > > lie and all this BS does nothing but make you look

ridiculous.

> LMAO.
> >
> > And thank you for admitting to accepting the fact that your
writing
> > is so full of holes even a cheap swiss cheese manufacturer in
China
> > would feel guilty using you.
>
> Asserted lie with a touch of RIV. Tell us all about the "golf
balls" again, chicken-man.
>
> > You really, REALLY ought to work on that
> > skill instead of wandering all over the map with a subject. If
> > possible, try to think of how other people view your borny
> > statements, then take it from there.
>
> RIV. You've got to give that inner voice credit, it knows Robbie
> inside and out.

More loss for words.....You're so boring.

Back to a "loss for words" ... Come on, chicken-man, make up your
mind.

> > > They're geeks, cheats and crooks, and they made a deal with
> > > > the prosecutor if you've ever followed up on what THEY
wrote.
> > > You want to believe what they said was complete and the end-
all--
> > > have at it. I know differently.
> > > > > > >
> > > LMAO. When faced with direct supporting evidence to my "fact"
> > (machines are random/fair) all little Robbie can do is
> > > babble. Please explain why they would lie about the how VP
> machines
> > > > > operated? Can't do it? Your embarrassment continues.
> > >
> > > > > > You're dumbfoundedness is all due to your obvious and
> > > continuing lack of experience in the outside world, little
dicky.
> >
> > > > > Asserted lie. Rob has no knowledge of my "outside
> experience".
> > > Not to mention that he avoids the question for which he has

no

> > answer.
> >
> > > > One's lack of life's experiences is easily detectable in

how

> one
> > writes.
> >
> > > If it's so easy how come you haven't been able to figure me
out?
> > What happened to that claim 3 months ago that you would be
> releasing
> > all kinds of hideous facts about me? Do you ever quit lying?
> >
> > You've already been 'figured out' and when I say it all you do
is
> > deny, deny, deny.
>
> Still nothing to support your claim, chicken-man? Anyone
surprised?

You're writing tells all about you and how I'm spot-on with my
analysis of you.

Was that too many words or too few? We're all trying to understand
your scrambling technique.

>
> > Can't blame you though. I'd do the same if I were
> > in your shoes. You have little if anything that's interesting
about
> > you, and I've already released facts about your problem
gambling,
> > addiction, your mistreatment and scouraging of your wife. Get
real.
> > What could be more hideous than that?
>
> You had asserted those lies previously. You claimed you had MORE.
> LMAO. You get caught in these lies all the time. Don't you ever
get tired of looking foolish?

Yeah, I guess it hurts too much to read the words again. The truth
does that to losers.

Back to "words" again. Do I detect a pattern. What should I hold
next? ROTFLMAO.

>
> >
> > > Certain parts of what your nerd heroes did were quashed

before

> they
> > were allowed to write their book. Plea deals are made all the
time,
> > and if you really knew anything about the casino industry like
you
> > say you do, you'd have known that and saved this embarrassing
> moment.
> >
> > > > > Yawn, a lot of words, no information. Typical con.
> >
> > > > And just how would you respond if the court documents were
> placed
> > > > right in front of you?
> >
> > > Let's see 'em. Another typical con man assertion.
> >
> > Avoiding the question--it's either stupidity or fear. your
choice.
>
> RIV. I'm still waiting for you to tell me why these guys would
lie.
> They stated the machines used a simple RNG. No secondary
programming,
> no hot and cold streaks. Once again, quit your babbling and

answer

> the question. Why would they lie?

You've been told. Plea arrangements are not lies.

There was no plea arrangement. Quit your lies and answer the question.

Facts are removed
and parts of the prosecution is quashed forever. Are you so naiive
that you don't have experience in that field too?

LMAO. Even though Rob has been caught in a lie, he continues as if
the rest of us can't read.

>
> >
> > > > You'd say the usual "Ha--I could make the same
> > > > stuff up on a $100 printer"! You will never admit to
anything
> > that tugs at your trousers.
>
> There was NO plea bargain. That is another LIE. The casinos did
not press charges. PERIOD.

Hello Einstein, but the casinos didn't HAVE to 'press charges' for
the prosecution to move ahead with it! And that's exactly what they
did.

What part of "About six months later, Marco received a letter saying
that charges against him were not being pressed" did you fail to
understand? Do I need to post the reference again? I read it, Bozo,
you can't assert your lies and get away with it. (scan for aftermath
in the article below to see this quote, you need to cut and paste all
3 lines into your web brower)

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:6ev-
BH76FmoJ:media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/97/07645695/0764569597.p
df+hacking+the+casinos+for+a+million+bucks&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

God, this is embarrassing having to lecture you on EVERY issue
that comes up!

You should be embarrassed. Caught in yet another lie. Tell everyone
how it feels.

The description of the RNG is all there on the
> web page. You're not even doing a good job of scrambling. Why
would they lie?
>
> > This is the same problem you have with contract wording
> > comprehension. You'll never understand any of it because you
just
> > aren't trained to think in a professional manner.
>
> A professional would not lie as you just did. All I had to do was
> read the article. RIV was sure on the mark here.

A professional would understand what he reads. That clearly leaves
you out. You're so used to discussions with geeks in a locked room
that you have zero idea what really goes on anywhere else.

If anyone (teacuplilly?) ever doubted that Rob is a LIAR, here is
absolute proof. He makes up a mythical "plea bargain" so he doesn't
have to answer the question "why would they lie". The obvious answer
is ... they wouldn't. Which, by the way, contradicts Rob's lie about
secondary programming. How sweet it is ...

>
> > All fact to the unblind. You provided contractual language with
no
> > knowledge of how to interpret it in a Governmental setting.
>
> Good grief. After getting caught in the lie above, do you really
> think anyone will believe this con man jargon?

Certainly not you. How much of that armor's left anyway.....

How sweet it is ...

>
>> > > > > Working for the gov't and serving your country are two
> > different things. Let's make that clear. Of course, I still
suspect
> > your 10 years was behind some very large walls.
> > > >
> > > > 10 years--mostly on airplanes and in third world countries
> going
> > > > after those who were suspected of wanting to cause harm to
the
> US.
> > >
> > > Yup, we've seen this one before. Was your MBA required
training?
> >
> > The MBA was required for being hired.
>
> I see, they wanted you to kill 'em with a spread sheet.

What's a spread sheet?

Excel ... Lotus 123 ... a simple budget ... audit report. Take your
pick. You know, those things MBAs use all the time.

> > > > Better known as terrorists today. Tell me, have you ever
killed
> > > > anyone…or was it that you just WANTED to kill the nerd
next
> to
> > > you for wheezing all the time?
> > >
> > > Maybe it was that engineering degree. Too bad you have been
> caught
> > in so many lies. How could anyone ever believe any of this even
on
> > the off chance it was true?
> >
> > I wonder…Is your jealousy and feeling little compared to my
past
> > the MAIN reason you chose not to meet me in the radio booth for
a
> > $5000 bet where I would present my documentation that you claim
> > doesn't exist
>
> Asserted lie. I don't doubt you have been to several countries.
The
> job??? I suspect "gofer" would be a better description. Maybe
that's
> where RIV came up with "golf balls". It was telling us you're
> a "gofer goof ball".

OK. I accept the apology.

No apology offered. Now, tell us about those dangerous days at the
adding machines.

>
> ---or do you feel more comfortable never seeing any of
> > it and pretending it doesn't exist? This sounds exactly like
your
> > escape from the reality of the machines running in the cycles
you
> > don't want them to. Now do you understand why I call you an
> introvert?
>
> No, that doesn't follow from your asserted lies. It's your

typical

> use of illogic. We've seen it many times before.

When you're lost, just say so.

RIV.

>
> >
> > > I especially like the last item which clearly forbids the
> > exact thing Rob stated was done .. "Every installation requires
the
> > vp machine NEVER dip below a certain hold percentage". Come on
Rob,
> > please explain how machines can do this while meeting the above
> > regulation.
> >
> > > > > > Oh man, you are REALLY infected with your disease! You
only
> > see ONE interpretation of the wording and that's it!?!
> >
> > > > > No, I assume most folks can see the INTENDED
interpretation.
> > Your words are sounding very hollow.
> > > >
> > > > That's because you aren't trained in how to read complex
and/or
> > > dual-purpose contracts.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately for your idiotic claims, this is a regulation,
not
> a
> > > contract.
> >
> > Therein lies the problem.
>
> For you ... absolutely.
>
> > You don't realize or recognize that a
> > regulation IS a pertinent and relevant part of a contract. When
> > you're that far off base, you'll never make it home.
>
> Of course it is, little man. Do you have any idea how ridiculous
you
> look? Most people have signed a few contracts in their life and,
> guess what, NONE of them contained regulations. LMAO. You should
try
> another lie, this one's not working.

Just how dumb are you? All contracts have terms or in this case,
regulations.

Sorry, two different things.

Main Entry: 1reg·u·la·tion
Pronunciation: "re-gy&-'lA-sh&n, "re-g&-
Function: noun
1 : the act of regulating : the state of being regulated
2 a : an authoritative rule dealing with details or procedure <safety

b : a rule or order issued by an executive authority or

regulatory agency of a government and having the force of law

Main Entry: 1term
Pronunciation: 't&rm
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English terme boundary, end, from Old French, from
Latin terminus; akin to Greek termOn boundary, end, Sanskrit tarman
top of a post
...
3 plural : provisions that determine the nature and scope of an
agreement : CONDITIONS <terms of sale> <liberal credit terms>

Terms are an agreement between two parties. Regulations are set down
by authorities, those bound by these regs have no say in the matter.
Must you insist on showing your ignorance so often?

All you're doing is putting both you inexperience AND
stupidity on display. Now I know what Bob meant about you being
tiresome. It's caused by your thickness.

RIV. How sweet it is ...

>
> > > > Just take a good look at your bumbling with this
> > > > issue.
> > >
> > > RIV. Could it be any more obvious ...
> >
> > You mean why you were locked up in the geek room when the
customers
> > came to town?
>
> I spent many hours with customers. Are you ever right? Many of
those locations I gave you earlier were for customer visits.

I know just how it goes. when the geek comes in the room they go

get

you. But as soon as the discussion gets serious and the specs are
agreed upon, they kick you out, simply because your kind are more
interested in giving away the store than sticking it to the
customer. No wonder your reviews weren't stellar.

RIV. Tell us again about all this contract expertise. You don't even
undertand the difference between a regulation and terms & conditions.
How sweet it is ...

> > If you weren't so cowardly, you'd meet up with
> > me where you'd be educated on the inherent but required
> > contradictions most Gov't contracts include.
>
> Irrelevant, we're discussing regulations.

Call the Gaming commission and see if the regs are part of their
toilet paper....or contract with the state!

The NGC is part of the STATE, moron. These lies to protect lies are
getting you nowhere.

http://www.nv.gov/new_RegulatoryAgencies.htm

Please, tell again about the state having a contract with ... uh, the
state. ROTFLMAO.

>
> > Like i said, you'll be
> > swimming upstream on this until your more than the beet red-
faced fool you appear to be now.
>
> >
> > You want to try that again? Did you say you have the 'big

belly'

> I've
> > factualized about you that you denied? Or was i hearing

things??

>
> You heard right. Big belly laugh. And, you know exactly what it
> means. PS. So does everyone else.

Let me guess. It's what all addicts who aren't on speed get.

It's what honest folk do when they see you scramble around after
being caught in yet another lie.

···

Date: 1665
Date: 13th century

[Rob_Singer1]

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > > > > Face it, little dicky. He doesn't want to have a back and
> forth
> > > > with illogic because he has better things to do--like work.
> > >
> > > > I think that's up for him to decide.
> > >
> > > Yup, and the neurotic in you didn't listen.
> >
> > He did respond. I guess that pretty much negates Rob's comment.
>
> All except for the fact that the neurotic in you didn't
> listen....and the wee fact that he told you how tiresome you've
> become.....

If he answers a post then he invites a response. Do I have to

explain to you how public forums work ... again? It's only been a few
days since the last time.

Did I mention the word 'neurotic'?

> > > Maybe the problem lies in your intelligence level. Maybe you
> just don't have what he & I have when it comes to recognizing
cycles at the machines!
> >
> > Or, maybe there aren't any and neither one of you understand
> > randomness.
>
> Yup--you just confirmed the reason---It's your intelligence level
> that's the culprit here.

OK, please explain what random means.

It means whatever it is you want it to mean....otherwise, regardless
of the expertise that lies behind anything else, you're in total
denial.
  

> > > And when my suspicions were verified by the SW engineer
> > > at IGT, the smartest among us listened to me.
>
> > Give us his name. What? No name ... again? This "inside info"

con is getting very tiring.

>
> I'll tell you what. I'll SELL you his name, number and even his
home address. $10,000.

Did I mention it was a con ... Proof positive.

Positive? You got the money I got the name!

> C'mon little dicky. Put up or look stupider.
> Imagine how all your fears will be met head-on when you talk to
this guy--and he makes mincemeat out of you to the tune of how I do

it??

Do others fall for this obvious con? You must hang around with real
morons. If you had a name you'd have wriiten it in all caps.

So, "Put up or look stupider."

C'mon. the price is only $10k, and to a WINNER like you, that's
peanuts!

> > > That simply confirms
> > > what I've been saying all along--you and Dancer and the rest

of the make-believe artists don't win a thing.

> >
> > Asserted lie. I win. Is this RIV pointing out that Rob has been
> lying to us all along?
>
> You're a big loser and you know it.

Asserted lie. But, still indicative that Rob has been lying all

along about his results.

If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done it by now.
Instead, you choose to suffer through what to a geek must be
unbearable embarrassment.

> You all use the same tricks that
> I've exposed over and over again as new generations of players
> arrive.

Telling the truth? Yup, that's the trick I use.

> Play $2million of coin thru at a theoretical 1.2% 'edge',
> lose $55,000....but lo and behold, you can tell the world that
> you've WON a sweet $24,000 because that's what the numbers say

you should have won with that 'edge'.

Is this supposed to be your personal results. Sounds reasonable
except for the missing minus sign (-1.2%).

Phantom bucks either way....but a way out for the gurus and the likes
of you, who make believe they're the winners of the year every year
with such nonsense.

> You can even throw a few thousand
> in there because you played 'tournaments'...and lost them too.

It's like a bunch of clowns being ripped a new one by me week after
week after week.

Yup. I can hear the moans ... wait, I didn't hear any. Could this

be another lie? Well, of course it is. Rob couldn't go down without

throwing in a few idiotic assertions.

Exactly what I mean when you are getting ripped a new one. Kinda
makes you hold your breath, doesn't it!

>
> > > > How can you tell a machine is hot? In my analogy, why
wouldn't
> > > > you say the golf clubs were "hot"? I think this is

important.

> If there is a way to determine this then casinos should be easy

to

> beat.
> > >
> > > > > HELLO!? DISCOVER AMERICA??!! He already TOLD you how,
> Einstein!
> > > >
> > > > I see, if you see a seven come up in two hands in a row,

then

> you should hold the sevens over 77AAA. Is that what you want
> everyone to do?
> > >
> > > First, he didn't say that. Read his post again and become
> readily educated even if you try and reject it out of
> dumbfoundedness---again.
> >
> > He provided no definable process.
>
> So the geek in you figures "I'll just make it all up!"

What choice did he leave? He provided nothing usable. Or, is this

the part where we're all supposed to be mind readers?

He left you with some common sense and some reality. Truly, foreign
entities to a theorist wearing blinders.

> To say he wins because of some
> > nebulous claim of detecting patterns is about the same as
claiming hitting the hold button a few times increases wins.

Actually, the latter is a definable and testable process. It's worth
more.

>
> Um....not a good effort there, little dicky. You don't understand
it and obviously don't have his talent. Save your dignity and just
> admit it.

Robbie can't refute my logic once again. RIV steps in and tells us
why.

When all you can come up with is 'hit the hold button' the flow of
illogic begins to overpower. Save your dignity....heed those words.

> > The only thing I've seen so far is an unverifiable claim. Even
> Bob isn't sure he hasn't simply been lucky.
>
> Then it all went right thru that big ol' hole in your head again.
He
> says he's been lucky, and even luckier when he applies his

pattern-detection skills. but that hurts you, doesn't it.

Doesn't have any effect on me.

Of course not, and he predicted it wouldn't because of your bias and
geek-logic long ago.

Not being able to define these

arbitrary "pattern-detection skills" makes them worthless and

leaves you alone with your own unverifiable claims and your con.

>
> > > So how in the world do you expect anyone to lay it out for

you--

-

Simple. Write down the process.

>
> That's funny.....I've already read what he wrote and I understand
> it. Now where'd you say you went to school?

OK, you write down the process.

How about "OK, YOU go back and READ the process"! Your famous for
your selective interpretations. Try harder and maybe you'll find a
cure.

>
> > > with
> > > the Queen doing a strip-tease at one end and Paymar counting
> sheep at the other? Nothing's verifiable to you FOR REAL. All you
> know is theory, and this ain't about that.
>
> > It's about a claimed method for forecasting future hands on a

VP machine. You and Bob claim this capability, but provide no way to

> > substantiate your claims.
>
> Sorry for embarrassing you AGAIN, Einstein....but my way and his
way of substantiating our claims is by how much we've won.

Meaningless. If you haven't kept track of all your special plays

then we have no way of determining how much they've helped (or hurt)
your overall results.

> Not good
> enough for the geek? Then write down EXACTLY your rendition of
> detailed 'substantiation' would be.

Already done.

And it is?

> And while you're at it, prove to
> us that you 'win' with your nerd method by providing verifiable
> substantiation that it has indeed happened as you claim it has.
Then
> I'll do the same and I'm sure Bob will too!

Sorry, moron, but this has been covered ad nausium. No individual
results are meaningful. It's like saying one at bat by a baseball
player constitutes proof of his skill. However, if you think it's

so important then provide us with the PROOF that you have won.

So when challenged to provide exactly what you challenge another to
supply, you deek out thru one of your famous escape routes. You'll
all class, little dicky.

PS,

anyone who wants to see my bank statments is more than welcome.

I want to see them....and then you can explain to me how the entries
correlate to the gambling fever you have.

> For all we know Bob is psychic( and
> > doesn't realize this is the reason for his turn around. Of
course,
> > this would be worthless to anyone else.
>
> What you do know is that I'M psychic. I can see right through you
> all the time.

Is that why you make yourself look foolish so often? It must be
that "gofer goof ball" in you that does it.

Right thru you, little dicky....right thru you.

> > > Remember
> > > how I was told my $20k on $25 DDB really COST me X amount?

Even

> > > Elliott Shapiro chastised me after winning the $100k royal

for

> > using
> > > a special play to hit it. He told me that 'stupid play' cost

me over $125! Just call me stupid!!

> >
> > You're stupid.
>
> And there you have it! Little dicky calling someone stupid for
> winning,

No, I called you stupid because it's true. You prove it every time
you post.

??? How about explaing how it's stupid to take home the real money
and leave the phantom bucks sitting on the floor!

> lets see.....$99,875 (no tip of course) when in reality, he
> calculates it out to a $125 loss. Go ahead. Call me stupid one

more time, because now that you have a dozen eggs on your face, you

> certainly don't have any other words to chime in with on THIS one!

If you think being lucky constitutes intelligence, then you are far
more stupid than I can put into words.

Being lucky thru the use of intelligent special plays. Sorry, but you
can cry all you want.

There's very little difference
between you and the hold tappers. Let's hear how smart those

lastest Power Ball winners were. Explain why they were smart and the
other millions of players were stupid.

Were they able to detect a pattern like I did at that machine? If so,
then they're very intelligent players, and a big cut above you.

> > However, they have a definable process. That puts them one up

on you and Bob.

>
> Did you really pass 4th grade reading? Really?? Read my strategy
> again,

We're talking about special plays and I wouldn't waste my time
reading yours. Is that 4th grade reading comprehension you're
displaying?

Oh that's right. You've already admitted not really knowing what they
entail. Oh dear.

> then read Bob's post one more time. Then you have permission
> to take a cold shower.

Why? It still provides no information. Do you think "unorthodox"
conveys any usable information? Is your brain permanently damaged?

And this is exactly why you should be in the cold shower right about
now!

> > So, you finally admit that simply changing machines has the

same

> > effect as going home. What happened to your previous claim that
> you should go home?
>
> I thought you read my strategies....man, you really didn't!

I've told you many times I haven't read your strategies. Did the

part

about wasting my time escape you? Didn't I mention Reid's proof,

that

no progression can effect the payback of game, enough times? Is

your

brain damaged? I based my sim on your explanation in this forum.

So why talk about 'special plays' if you both haven't read my
strategy, and haven't read what Bob told you?? In fact, what were
those useless simulations for if you hadn't understood the spec first!

> What
> kind of a fact-collector are you??

I'm not a "fact-collector", I'm a con exposer. By the way, if you

had any facts you would have posted them long ago. Their absence
proves you have nothing.

The only facts here are those provided by me when I show how you make
believe and never read anything, and how I prove you're a liar when
you say "Gee I win!".

> > > So now Bob's a liar too--only you're refraining from calling
him that??
> >
> > I assume he either misread or misinterpreted or, another very
> likely situation, the writer was confused. We've certainly seen
that
> in most of Rob's writings.
>
> Of course he was confused, little dicky.....of COURSE he was! No
one
> could ever POSSIBLY have more insight and knowledge than our own
> little dicky.....

Not in this area. They might have equivalent knowledge, but not

more.

Ah-ha HAHAHA!! Help me someone--I'm ready to pass out friom
LAUGHTER!!!!!

Computers are really simple tools.

So THAT's why you chose that field.....

They do what they are programmed
to do. To make a statement like Bob did is nonsense to even a

novice programmer. And, I already explained exactly how mirror
results could occur. You're being foolish again, little man.

This is so funny. You're being humiliated in your own field, and the
best part is, you're BURYING YOURSELF with every word you write!
  

> > > Is everyone supposed to be stupid and ignorant without
> > > knowledge of anything pertinent except you?
>
> > In this case, it appears so. I know what I'm talking about and
> could write a coin-flip simulator in less that a day myself. All

it

> would take is deleting a lot of code from my VP simulator.
>
> You apparently don't know as much as you think you do. Bob

wouldn't lie about that because he has no reason to.

Like I said, there are several possible reasons for his confusion,
lying is your game.

So now he's not lying. Which is it? All we see here is your covering
your butt by saying "no one can do it better'. Well, genius, looks
like you've been trumped. Here's some words I'm sure you've heard
many-a time "YOU'RE FIRED!"

> I make you look small
> enough by firing a truth barrage at you every day. Accept the

fact that you were one-upped this time,

OK, tell you what. I'll bet you $10,000 that I can produce a

program

that correctly simulates a coin toss using a standard PRNG and
produces results favoring either heads and tails. You can have
anybody you want check the code and I will change it if they find a
problem. How about it? ... Now, you know how it really feels to
be "one-upped".

Hmmmm....I did a little research on this while you were scrambling
around trying to figure out how to respond to all the logic you're
made to take in. I found out that the 'head' side had slighty higher
weight in every coin except 50c. Are you capable of programming that
in?

> go in the corner and give it a
> good cry, call your mommy and maybe she'll listen to you, then

come back and face the world like a man.

RIV.

Waaa....waaa..cry me a river!

>
> > > > No, I was trying to see if he could specify HOW he improves
> his
> > > > results. If he can't then his approach is no better than
> hitting
> > > hold button several times before the draw button.
> > >
> > > He just told you....AGAIN. He 'discerns' short-term patterns.
> Some people just may have that ability--even if you don't.
> >
> > If "some people" have this ability then why can't they explain

it?

>
> I explained mine and he explained his.

No, you have provided no repeatable process. You only claim it like

a typical con man. Put up or shut up.

It's all been explained and said, little dicky. You can't accept it,
then like I said, cry me a river.....

> What more do you want--us to
> act like geeks at the machines and record evey hand and card
> occurrence?

It has nothing to do with recording results. Your brain is damaged,
isn't it? ... All you have to write down the steps that you follow

in recognizing the "pattern" and then define how that effects your

future plays.

HELLO Einstein & McFLY!! The 'pattern' only shows up at the machines
and there are no 'steps' to it unless and until the machine performs.
All the intelligent gambler need do is follow the card sequences/hand
occurrences and the answer is right there. You can't do it? Then cry
me another river.

> > > And just how
> > > does one go about 'testing and verifying' what he says he

does anyway?

> >
> > Simple. Get a group of people to try it and report their

results. I'm willing to try it at low denoms. All I need is the
process.

>
> HAHAHAHAHA!! You mean like in a gang-bang video poker marathon?
> Here's your process: put the money in, play the hands, and if you
> have the talent to detect patterns then you will. Very simple.

This is all I wanted you to admit. You have no process. You can't
explain it to anyone. Typical con man BS. We've seen it all before.

It's all right there, little dicky. Accept it or cry me a river.....

Robbie: Go ahead and detect the patterns.
Student: How do I do that?
Robbie: Uh, just do it like I said.
Student: You didn't say anything.
Robbie: Boy are you stupid. I guess some students can't be taught.
Student: You're right Robbie. Now where do you want me to cry you a

river?

> now I suggest you go repair those kinks
> in your severly weakened armor before you just blow away.
> > > you can hide behind your theories
> > > as 'facts' as much as you like, but they've never protected

you from the truth.

> >
> > RIV. Let me take a second to explain this to CF. This acronym
> means you should reread what Rob has just written and understand
> that the words he uses are his inner self's way of describing Rob
to
> the rest of us. I don't think you want me explain this every time.
>
> Too bad little dicky. Whenever you go into that tirade all you're
> doing is slapping the "I am a sap" sticker on your forehead for

all the world to see.

I see, now your speaking for both Bob and CF. I wonder how they

like that? Hey guys, don't bother posting any more. Rob has read your

minds and will take over from here.

You're right. They'll say the same as me. You have this weak tirade
going on and all you can do is rant and then cry. Never any facts.
All accusations simply because you feel inferior and you like crying
in the rain.

> You have yet to find a way to protect you from the
> undeniable truth. I wish I could say I feel your pain....but you

so deservedly get the whole enchilada every time you ask for it.

RIV.

I see your pain....

> >
> > > > > I kinda think it is YOU who don't believe anyone else.....
> > >
> > > > Coming from the man who claims ALL APers lose ... I was
simply
> > > > pointing out the contradiction in his statements.
> > >
> > > And you know I'm right.
> >
> > Asserted lie. I win. Is this really RIV commenting on Rob?
>
> You're a loser and a sore one at that.

My fingers are a little sore from bowling yesterday, that's about

it. My bank account is still ++++++. Still want to see my deposit
slips?

Hmmm...I just made a deposit too today, and I didn't even step inside
a casino. So whatever you have HAS to be from playing, right? Or is
it more of those phantom bucks you're so famous for.....

> why else would you get so
> riled up over someone else who says they win?

Asserted lie. So far, Robbie appears to be the only one "riled" up.
Is that because he can't provide a process? Could be.

Remember little dickey. the only fools who get riled up and angered
at winners are those who cannot and do not win. It's all part of your
disease. Winners love other winners and would never grill them on the
how and why. That is a product of envy.

. surprising he has had the exact short term fluctuations that he

> > indicated. No special plays required. My own personal results
> reflect
> > this possiblity.
>
> Translation: little dicky is trying to be one of the boys....

I guess the truth is discouraged by Rob.

And when he is rejected by 'the boys' he hurts and lies. My oh my!

>
> I've mentioned it before. I started out my AP play
> > with a long losing streak (over 200K hands). Lost over $6K

at .25

> > play. What if I would have decided at that time to modify my
> approach
> > and incorporate some special plays? I might have been convinced
> these
> > were the reasons for my new success. However, I became

successful

> > without doing this. Understanding short term fluctuations is

all

> it takes.
>
> ....but now he goes right back into his comfy blankey again.

Just the facts, as usual. Logic gets these replies every time.

It's the corny stories and the LIES that get you every time. I keep
picking you off like a duck on a pond and you remain blind to it all.
Only a mother could love a blind nerd such as you.....
   

> > > > > > I've won every year but one since I been keeping
records.
> > > > > > Interestingly, the polls track very nicely with
> mathematical projections.
> > >
> > > > > Now we get back into the required bragging part of what
it's
> > like to be a compulsive gambler who loses more than he wins.
> > >
> > > > Asserted lie. Did I mention you claim ALL APers lose?
>
> If you did, you should heed the words of truth.

That's all I do, which demonstrates you constantly lie.

So you heed my words...good boy. Now repeat them and you'll be set
free!

> > >
> > > Try to be wishy-washy....try to be vague or change the issue.
> > Either way you cut it, losers are always quick to point out how
> > they 'win'. And the ones who do offend repeatedly are the ones
> with the worst gambling problems.
> >
> > I do believe RIV has just explained that ROB is a loser.
>
> Sounds like you twisted your tongue on that one. Wanna try it
again??

Nope, everyone else can read.

Just as I did. You twisted it out of shape again. But you've bot
another shot at making snese.Go ahead, give it a try.

> > > You're lucky. you've got the truth coming at you here from

all

> > around!
> >
> > Let me get this straight. You and Bob constitute "all around"?
> While
> > the 6000 or so members of VPfree constitute what? LMAO. PS.
> > teacuplily has already admitted he loses with your system. He
just
> > blames the casinos in AC instead of accepting the truth.
>
> It's written all over you. the only words you hear are from those
of us whom you want to emulate.
> Teacup said what?

Teacuplilly complained that he always loses in AC. He uses your
system. He claims the machines are gaffed. You supported him. Need

I say more?

That's funny. I've never heard of the teacup before and you know he
loses in AC and uses only my strategy? What'd you do, set up your
slide rule to take notes?

> > Then you are saying that skill is involved. You can't have it
both ways. It can't be ALL LUCK, while admitting that decisions

must be made. You've gotten yourself into what is called a catch-22.

>
> Here's the same flash you get every day: A winning hand is

nothing but good luck, and a losing hand is nothing but bad luck. no
skill involved.

Then just keep hitting deal/draw. No sense holding any cards if

it's all luck. No sense in ANY special plays. Do you even have a clue
how idiotic you sound?

Here's the dicker: "Get dealt two Aces and 3 junk cards, stop, make a
decision on what the best hand to hold is, then hold it" Duh?? Could
it be the ACES?? You're so stupid AND IN SUCH DIRE NEED OF TRUE
GEEKNESS TAKING OVER THE EARTH THAT YOU make believe there's skill
involved when a chimp can do it. I hear the audience laughing at you
from every part of the world that you want so much to be geek-like!

> You go into vp with a basic understanding of common sense
> and you let the cards fall. The choice of what to hold is not a
> decision--but common sense and nothing more. A monkey could be
> trained to do it just as well as you.

Common sense? If it is so common then why haven't the casinos all
gone out of business? And, once again, why would it matter what you
hold if the results are pure luck anyway?

Huh? Here's a flash and a half: Holding obvious cards isn't the
result of being tapped on the shoulder by Einstein. It's common sense
and is what everyone who plays tries to rely upon. The fantasy that
there's some kind of skill involved is a theoretical state of mind,
devoid of any and all reality. And the hold doesn't mean you'll win.
If you're lucky you will. If you're unlucky you won't. How much
simpler can it get for such a geeky simpleton??

> How much you selling those comfy blankeys for---or does the

price rise after every losing session??!

I don't sell anything. That's why I'm believable and you're not. I
have nothing to gain or lose while your job, your books, your life

is based on a lie. Admit the lie and you're back on the streets. I

understand WHY you run your con, it's still not right.

So how much you selling that crybaby rant for??

···

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

[Rob_Singer1]

I have to laugh at little dicky and feel sorry for him at the same
time. He went thru this wasting time posting his nonsense every time I
commanded him to, yet all I needed to do was delete the whole thing
simply because I gave him a fresh start on another post that explains
the knowledge he lacks. What a dufus!

···

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

> > As is the case here where Rob tried to lie and say my analogy was
> > about "golf balls". It appears he's still rattled.

> Wordy explanations again as you try to babble your way out.
> Sorry.....

[rgmustain]

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

> > > > > > Face it, little dicky. He doesn't want to have a back

and

> > forth
> > > > > with illogic because he has better things to do--like

work.

> > > >
> > > > > I think that's up for him to decide.
> > > >
> > > > Yup, and the neurotic in you didn't listen.
> > >
> > > He did respond. I guess that pretty much negates Rob's

comment.

> >
> > All except for the fact that the neurotic in you didn't
> > listen....and the wee fact that he told you how tiresome you've
> > become.....
>
> If he answers a post then he invites a response. Do I have to
explain to you how public forums work ... again? It's only been a

few

days since the last time.

Did I mention the word 'neurotic'?

This coming from a person that has to respond to every post on this
forum ... pot-kettle-black.

> > > > Maybe the problem lies in your intelligence level. Maybe

you

> > just don't have what he & I have when it comes to recognizing
> cycles at the machines!
> > >
> > > Or, maybe there aren't any and neither one of you understand
> > > randomness.
> >
> > Yup--you just confirmed the reason---It's your intelligence

level

> > that's the culprit here.
>
> OK, please explain what random means.

It means whatever it is you want it to mean....otherwise,

regardless

of the expertise that lies behind anything else, you're in total
denial.

LMAO. That answers the question of intellegence.

> > > > And when my suspicions were verified by the SW engineer
> > > > at IGT, the smartest among us listened to me.
> >
> > > Give us his name. What? No name ... again? This "inside info"
con is getting very tiring.
> >
> > I'll tell you what. I'll SELL you his name, number and even his
> home address. $10,000.
>
> Did I mention it was a con ... Proof positive.

Positive? You got the money I got the name!

I got lots of money, you got con. Me too smart to fall for it.

> > C'mon little dicky. Put up or look stupider.
> > Imagine how all your fears will be met head-on when you talk to
> this guy--and he makes mincemeat out of you to the tune of how I

do

it??
>
> Do others fall for this obvious con? You must hang around with

real

> morons. If you had a name you'd have wriiten it in all caps.
So, "Put up or look stupider."

C'mon. the price is only $10k, and to a WINNER like you, that's
peanuts!

You should try Bob, he might fall for it. The rest of us are way to
smart.

>
> > > > That simply confirms
> > > > what I've been saying all along--you and Dancer and the

rest

of the make-believe artists don't win a thing.
> > >
> > > Asserted lie. I win. Is this RIV pointing out that Rob has

been

> > lying to us all along?
> >
> > You're a big loser and you know it.
>
> Asserted lie. But, still indicative that Rob has been lying all
along about his results.

If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done it by now.

What more proof do you need? My bank account is an open book.

Instead, you choose to suffer through what to a geek must be
unbearable embarrassment.

RIV. And clearly indicative of Rob's position at this time. He's been
caught in so many lies that I've lost track. He quits responding to
those thread while jumping in and mentioning my name every time he
posts. I wonder if he realizes this justs adds to his embarrassment?

>
> > You all use the same tricks that
> > I've exposed over and over again as new generations of players
> > arrive.
>
> Telling the truth? Yup, that's the trick I use.
>
> > Play $2million of coin thru at a theoretical 1.2% 'edge',
> > lose $55,000....but lo and behold, you can tell the world that
> > you've WON a sweet $24,000 because that's what the numbers say
you should have won with that 'edge'.
>
> Is this supposed to be your personal results. Sounds reasonable
> except for the missing minus sign (-1.2%).

Phantom bucks either way....but a way out for the gurus and the

likes

of you, who make believe they're the winners of the year every year
with such nonsense.
>
> > You can even throw a few thousand
> > in there because you played 'tournaments'...and lost them too.
It's like a bunch of clowns being ripped a new one by me week after
week after week.
>
> Yup. I can hear the moans ... wait, I didn't hear any. Could

this

be another lie? Well, of course it is. Rob couldn't go down without
> throwing in a few idiotic assertions.

Exactly what I mean when you are getting ripped a new one. Kinda
makes you hold your breath, doesn't it!

It makes you look impotent and stupid. Works for me.

>
> >
> > > > > How can you tell a machine is hot? In my analogy, why
> wouldn't
> > > > > you say the golf clubs were "hot"? I think this is
important.
> > If there is a way to determine this then casinos should be easy
to
> > beat.
> > > >
> > > > > > HELLO!? DISCOVER AMERICA??!! He already TOLD you how,
> > Einstein!
> > > > >
> > > > > I see, if you see a seven come up in two hands in a row,
then
> > you should hold the sevens over 77AAA. Is that what you want
> > everyone to do?
> > > >
> > > > First, he didn't say that. Read his post again and become
> > readily educated even if you try and reject it out of
> > dumbfoundedness---again.
> > >
> > > He provided no definable process.
> >
> > So the geek in you figures "I'll just make it all up!"
>
> What choice did he leave? He provided nothing usable. Or, is this
the part where we're all supposed to be mind readers?

He left you with some common sense and some reality. Truly, foreign
entities to a theorist wearing blinders.

Once more Rob avoids providing any reasonable process; asserts some
nonsense; and runs away and hides. Wait, I think I just detected
another pattern, tell me Robbie, what should I hold?

> > To say he wins because of some
> > > nebulous claim of detecting patterns is about the same as
> claiming hitting the hold button a few times increases wins.
Actually, the latter is a definable and testable process. It's

worth

more.
> >
> > Um....not a good effort there, little dicky. You don't

understand

> it and obviously don't have his talent. Save your dignity and

just

> > admit it.
>
> Robbie can't refute my logic once again. RIV steps in and tells

us

> why.

When all you can come up with is 'hit the hold button' the flow of
illogic begins to overpower. Save your dignity....heed those words.

No, what I came up with is a process that is one-step better than a
mythical pattern detection one. It has a process (however
worthless) , you have none.

> > > The only thing I've seen so far is an unverifiable claim.

Even

> > Bob isn't sure he hasn't simply been lucky.
> >
> > Then it all went right thru that big ol' hole in your head

again.

> He
> > says he's been lucky, and even luckier when he applies his
pattern-detection skills. but that hurts you, doesn't it.
>
> Doesn't have any effect on me.

Of course not, and he predicted it wouldn't because of your bias

and

geek-logic long ago.

Sorry, little man, I've already said I believe Bob has won. What is
unverifiable is whether his undefinable special plays had any part in
it. You'd think that someone who claims no one will listen to him
would jump at the chance to discuss them. Instead he runs away and
refuses to discuss them. The only logical conclusion anyone can get
out of this is he has no idea whether these "unorthodox" plays have
had any impact on his results.

Not being able to define these
> arbitrary "pattern-detection skills" makes them worthless and
leaves you alone with your own unverifiable claims and your con.
>
> >
> > > > So how in the world do you expect anyone to lay it out for
you--
> -
Simple. Write down the process.
> >
> > That's funny.....I've already read what he wrote and I

understand

> > it. Now where'd you say you went to school?
>
> OK, you write down the process.

How about "OK, YOU go back and READ the process"!

Can't do it, can you? I rest my case.

Your famous for
your selective interpretations. Try harder and maybe you'll find a
cure.

RIV.

>
> >
> > > > with
> > > > the Queen doing a strip-tease at one end and Paymar

counting

> > sheep at the other? Nothing's verifiable to you FOR REAL. All

you

> > know is theory, and this ain't about that.
> >
> > > It's about a claimed method for forecasting future hands on a
VP machine. You and Bob claim this capability, but provide no way

to

> > > substantiate your claims.
> >
> > Sorry for embarrassing you AGAIN, Einstein....but my way and

his

> way of substantiating our claims is by how much we've won.
>
> Meaningless. If you haven't kept track of all your special plays
then we have no way of determining how much they've helped (or

hurt)

your overall results.

Cat got your tongue?

>
> > Not good
> > enough for the geek? Then write down EXACTLY your rendition of
> > detailed 'substantiation' would be.
>
> Already done.

And it is?

You've been reading it for a couple of days now. Write down the
process and we'll get a group together to use it and track the
results. It so simple a cave man could figure it out (sorry geico).

>
> > And while you're at it, prove to
> > us that you 'win' with your nerd method by providing verifiable
> > substantiation that it has indeed happened as you claim it has.
> Then
> > I'll do the same and I'm sure Bob will too!
>
> Sorry, moron, but this has been covered ad nausium. No individual
> results are meaningful. It's like saying one at bat by a baseball
> player constitutes proof of his skill. However, if you think it's
so important then provide us with the PROOF that you have won.

So when challenged to provide exactly what you challenge another to
supply, you deek out thru one of your famous escape routes. You'll
all class, little dicky.

Whatsa matta, chicken man, the truth hurts? Let's see YOUR results.
YOU brought it up. PROVE that you have won.

PS,
> anyone who wants to see my bank statments is more than welcome.

I want to see them....and then you can explain to me how the

entries

correlate to the gambling fever you have.

> > For all we know Bob is psychic( and
> > > doesn't realize this is the reason for his turn around. Of
> course,
> > > this would be worthless to anyone else.
> >
> > What you do know is that I'M psychic. I can see right through

you

> > all the time.
>
> Is that why you make yourself look foolish so often? It must be
> that "gofer goof ball" in you that does it.

Right thru you, little dicky....right thru you.

LMAO. Is that why you quit responding to the threads where I
demonstrate that you have lied? You better get those eyes checked
out.

>
> > > > Remember
> > > > how I was told my $20k on $25 DDB really COST me X amount?
Even
> > > > Elliott Shapiro chastised me after winning the $100k royal
for
> > > using
> > > > a special play to hit it. He told me that 'stupid play'

cost

me over $125! Just call me stupid!!
> > >
> > > You're stupid.
> >
> > And there you have it! Little dicky calling someone stupid for
> > winning,
>
> No, I called you stupid because it's true. You prove it every

time

> you post.

??? How about explaing how it's stupid to take home the real money
and leave the phantom bucks sitting on the floor!

You mean like the $75K you left by playing only 4 coins? Yup, they
were phantom bucks for you, weren't they?

>
> > lets see.....$99,875 (no tip of course) when in reality, he
> > calculates it out to a $125 loss. Go ahead. Call me stupid one
more time, because now that you have a dozen eggs on your face, you
> > certainly don't have any other words to chime in with on THIS

one!

> If you think being lucky constitutes intelligence, then you are

far

> more stupid than I can put into words.

Being lucky thru the use of intelligent special plays. Sorry, but

you

can cry all you want.

Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

>There's very little difference
> between you and the hold tappers. Let's hear how smart those
lastest Power Ball winners were. Explain why they were smart and

the

other millions of players were stupid.

Were they able to detect a pattern like I did at that machine? If

so,

then they're very intelligent players, and a big cut above you.

Yup, using the computer picks takes a lot of pattern recognition.
LMAO. So, tell us how power ball winners are smarter than the losers
simply because they got lucky and won. It takes so little effort to
see through your con, little man.

>
> > > However, they have a definable process. That puts them one up
on you and Bob.
> >
> > Did you really pass 4th grade reading? Really?? Read my

strategy

> > again,
>
> We're talking about special plays and I wouldn't waste my time
> reading yours. Is that 4th grade reading comprehension you're
> displaying?

Oh that's right. You've already admitted not really knowing what

they

entail. Oh dear.

I know all I need to know. You advocate making a negative play. What
more is there? It's equivalent to telling a baseball player to swing
at a few pitches with his eyes closed because he might get lucky.
Sure, it could happen, but over time it's a losing plan.

>
> > then read Bob's post one more time. Then you have permission
> > to take a cold shower.
>
> Why? It still provides no information. Do you think "unorthodox"
> conveys any usable information? Is your brain permanently damaged?

And this is exactly why you should be in the cold shower right

about

now!

Come on, explain how "unorthodox" conveys useful information. Let's
hear it, chicken man.

> > > So, you finally admit that simply changing machines has the
same
> > > effect as going home. What happened to your previous claim

that

> > you should go home?
> >
> > I thought you read my strategies....man, you really didn't!
>
> I've told you many times I haven't read your strategies. Did the
part
> about wasting my time escape you? Didn't I mention Reid's proof,
that
> no progression can effect the payback of game, enough times? Is
your
> brain damaged? I based my sim on your explanation in this forum.

So why talk about 'special plays' if you both haven't read my
strategy,

I already answer this above. How many baseball players would try
keeping their eyes closed? It's obviously a losing proposition ...
just like your special plays. I don't need to waste time reading your
special play nonsense to know that it's nonsense. To make matters
even worse for you, you 've mentioned a few of them here, proving
beyond any doubt that they are indeed con-man nonsense.

and haven't read what Bob told you?? In fact, what were
those useless simulations for if you hadn't understood the spec

first!

>
> > What
> > kind of a fact-collector are you??
>
> I'm not a "fact-collector", I'm a con exposer. By the way, if you
had any facts you would have posted them long ago. Their absence
proves you have nothing.

The only facts here are those provided by me

Sorry, LAFman, but you haven't provided a SINGLE verifiable fact.

when I show how you make
believe and never read anything, and how I prove you're a liar when
you say "Gee I win!".

Still waiting for single fact, LAFman. Note: Just in case CF has lost
track having to press the page down button a couple of time, LAF
means ... Liar and Fraud.

> > > > So now Bob's a liar too--only you're refraining from

calling

> him that??
> > >
> > > I assume he either misread or misinterpreted or, another very
> > likely situation, the writer was confused. We've certainly seen
> that
> > in most of Rob's writings.
> >
> > Of course he was confused, little dicky.....of COURSE he was!

No

> one
> > could ever POSSIBLY have more insight and knowledge than our

own

> > little dicky.....
>
> Not in this area. They might have equivalent knowledge, but not
more.

Ah-ha HAHAHA!! Help me someone--I'm ready to pass out friom
LAUGHTER!!!!!

RIV. Rob's been caught trying to sound important as another
embarrassing moment approaches.

> Computers are really simple tools.

So THAT's why you chose that field.....

Simple, powerful and requiring significant creativeness to get the
most out them.

>They do what they are programmed
> to do. To make a statement like Bob did is nonsense to even a
novice programmer. And, I already explained exactly how mirror
results could occur. You're being foolish again, little man.

This is so funny. You're being humiliated in your own field, and

the

best part is, you're BURYING YOURSELF with every word you write!

Of course I am ... as Robbie's embarrassment builds.

> > > > Is everyone supposed to be stupid and ignorant without
> > > > knowledge of anything pertinent except you?
> >
> > > In this case, it appears so. I know what I'm talking about

and

> > could write a coin-flip simulator in less that a day myself.

All

it
> > would take is deleting a lot of code from my VP simulator.
> >
> > You apparently don't know as much as you think you do. Bob
wouldn't lie about that because he has no reason to.

> Like I said, there are several possible reasons for his

confusion,

> lying is your game.

So now he's not lying. Which is it?

I see, you want to get a jump on your embarrassment. OK, if you go
back and look at my response, I said "lying is your game". LMAO.
Don't you understand that "your" refers to you, moron. Your poor
reading skills have done you in once again.

All we see here is your covering
your butt by saying "no one can do it better'. Well, genius, looks
like you've been trumped. Here's some words I'm sure you've heard
many-a time "YOU'RE FIRED!"

Still LMAO. You make an idiotic blunder and then RIV makes you look
even more foolish. I love it. I wonder what Donald would say to you
now?

>
> > I make you look small
> > enough by firing a truth barrage at you every day. Accept the
fact that you were one-upped this time,
>
> OK, tell you what. I'll bet you $10,000 that I can produce a
program
> that correctly simulates a coin toss using a standard PRNG and
> produces results favoring either heads and tails. You can have
> anybody you want check the code and I will change it if they find

a

> problem. How about it? ... Now, you know how it really feels to
> be "one-upped".

Hmmmm....I did a little research on this while you were scrambling
around trying to figure out how to respond to all the logic you're
made to take in. I found out that the 'head' side had slighty

higher

weight in every coin except 50c. Are you capable of programming

that

in?

ROTFLMAO. Sorry, while I take a break and catch my breath. This is
where Rob faces TOTAL humiliation. If the head has a "slighty higher
weight" then we all know it will come up more. The larger the weight
the more it will come up. We also know that is NOT what Bob stated.
He just said a "coin toss". Everyone reading his post understood that
he meant a FAIR coin toss, otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned the
small .002% variation. You've really stuck your nose in it now. How
does it smell?

> > go in the corner and give it a
> > good cry, call your mommy and maybe she'll listen to you, then
come back and face the world like a man.
>
> RIV.

Waaa....waaa..cry me a river!

I think you can handle that. How does it feel to be so outclassed?

>
> >
> > > > > No, I was trying to see if he could specify HOW he

improves

> > his
> > > > > results. If he can't then his approach is no better than
> > hitting
> > > > hold button several times before the draw button.
> > > >
> > > > He just told you....AGAIN. He 'discerns' short-term

patterns.

> > Some people just may have that ability--even if you don't.
> > >
> > > If "some people" have this ability then why can't they

explain

it?
> >
> > I explained mine and he explained his.
>
> No, you have provided no repeatable process. You only claim it

like

a typical con man. Put up or shut up.

It's all been explained and said, little dicky. You can't accept

it,

then like I said, cry me a river.....

Still waiting for that process. How sweet it is ...

>
> > What more do you want--us to
> > act like geeks at the machines and record evey hand and card
> > occurrence?
>
> It has nothing to do with recording results. Your brain is

damaged,

> isn't it? ... All you have to write down the steps that you

follow

in recognizing the "pattern" and then define how that effects your
> future plays.

HELLO Einstein & McFLY!! The 'pattern' only shows up at the

machines

and there are no 'steps' to it unless and until the machine

performs.

Give me a second, but I just can't stop laughing. How many times have
you used this con man BS? "I can't explain it to you, but TRUST me".
Rob, you are hilarious and I'm sure that RIV is celebrating.

All the intelligent gambler need do is follow the card

sequences/hand

occurrences and the answer is right there. You can't do it? Then

cry

me another river.

Just follow the UNDEFINED "card sequences/hand occurrences". Isn't
this exactly like my student/Robbie example I gave last time? This is
so funny, I am totally amazed a grown man could be this stupid.

>
> > > > And just how
> > > > does one go about 'testing and verifying' what he says he
does anyway?
> > >
> > > Simple. Get a group of people to try it and report their
results. I'm willing to try it at low denoms. All I need is the
process.
> >
> > HAHAHAHAHA!! You mean like in a gang-bang video poker marathon?
> > Here's your process: put the money in, play the hands, and if

you

> > have the talent to detect patterns then you will. Very simple.
>
> This is all I wanted you to admit. You have no process. You can't
> explain it to anyone. Typical con man BS. We've seen it all

before.

It's all right there, little dicky. Accept it or cry me a river.....

We all know who's crying right now. And, also, that you will never
admit it.

>
> Robbie: Go ahead and detect the patterns.
> Student: How do I do that?
> Robbie: Uh, just do it like I said.
> Student: You didn't say anything.
> Robbie: Boy are you stupid. I guess some students can't be taught.

Student: You're right Robbie. Now where do you want me to cry you

a

river?

Here it is, just like Robbie unknowingly stated above. Only, he adds
in another embarrassing line to make himself look even more foolish.

> > now I suggest you go repair those kinks
> > in your severly weakened armor before you just blow away.
> > > > you can hide behind your theories
> > > > as 'facts' as much as you like, but they've never protected
you from the truth.
> > >
> > > RIV. Let me take a second to explain this to CF. This acronym
> > means you should reread what Rob has just written and

understand

> > that the words he uses are his inner self's way of describing

Rob

> to
> > the rest of us. I don't think you want me explain this every

time.

> >
> > Too bad little dicky. Whenever you go into that tirade all

you're

> > doing is slapping the "I am a sap" sticker on your forehead for
all the world to see.
>
> I see, now your speaking for both Bob and CF. I wonder how they
like that? Hey guys, don't bother posting any more. Rob has read

your

> minds and will take over from here.

You're right. They'll say the same as me.

Is that right? Bob and CF, would you say the same things Rob has said
in this post? Bob, did you really mean "weighted coin toss" but
forgot to mention it?

You have this weak tirade
going on and all you can do is rant and then cry. Never any facts.
All accusations simply because you feel inferior and you like

crying

in the rain.

RIV.

>
> > You have yet to find a way to protect you from the
> > undeniable truth. I wish I could say I feel your pain....but

you

so deservedly get the whole enchilada every time you ask for it.
>
> RIV.

I see your pain....

RIV.

>
> > >
> > > > > > I kinda think it is YOU who don't believe anyone

else.....

> > > >
> > > > > Coming from the man who claims ALL APers lose ... I was
> simply
> > > > > pointing out the contradiction in his statements.
> > > >
> > > > And you know I'm right.
> > >
> > > Asserted lie. I win. Is this really RIV commenting on Rob?
> >
> > You're a loser and a sore one at that.
>
> My fingers are a little sore from bowling yesterday, that's about
it. My bank account is still ++++++. Still want to see my deposit
slips?

Hmmm...I just made a deposit too today, and I didn't even step

inside

a casino.

So, you wife has you running errands, good for her.

So whatever you have HAS to be from playing, right? Or is
it more of those phantom bucks you're so famous for.....

If I lost all the time as you claim, then my bank account should be
dwindling. Instead it keeps going up. So, do you want to see my bank
account or would you rather keep making foolish claims? We all know
the answer to this one.

> > why else would you get so
> > riled up over someone else who says they win?
>
> Asserted lie. So far, Robbie appears to be the only one "riled"

up.

> Is that because he can't provide a process? Could be.

Remember little dickey. the only fools who get riled up

RIV tells us just what we needed to know. Rob is "riled" up.

and angered
at winners are those who cannot and do not win. It's all part of

your

disease. Winners love other winners and would never grill them on

the

how and why. That is a product of envy.

LMAO. Still waiting for you to accept my offer of looking over my
bank account.

>
. surprising he has had the exact short term fluctuations that he
> > > indicated. No special plays required. My own personal results
> > reflect
> > > this possiblity.
> >
> > Translation: little dicky is trying to be one of the boys....
>
> I guess the truth is discouraged by Rob.

And when he is rejected by 'the boys' he hurts and lies. My oh my!

Hmmm. Could RIV be disclosing Rob's experience with the VP gurus? You
betcha.

>
> >
> > I've mentioned it before. I started out my AP play
> > > with a long losing streak (over 200K hands). Lost over $6K
at .25
> > > play. What if I would have decided at that time to modify my
> > approach
> > > and incorporate some special plays? I might have been

convinced

> > these
> > > were the reasons for my new success. However, I became
successful
> > > without doing this. Understanding short term fluctuations is
all
> > it takes.
> >
> > ....but now he goes right back into his comfy blankey again.
>
> Just the facts, as usual. Logic gets these replies every time.

It's the corny stories and the LIES that get you every time. I keep
picking you off like a duck on a pond and you remain blind to it

all.

Only a mother could love a blind nerd such as you.....

RIV. Since Rob been made to look extra foolish in this thread, RIV
has come out in full force. How sweet it is ...

> > > > > > > I've won every year but one since I been keeping
> records.
> > > > > > > Interestingly, the polls track very nicely with
> > mathematical projections.
> > > >
> > > > > > Now we get back into the required bragging part of what
> it's
> > > like to be a compulsive gambler who loses more than he wins.
> > > >
> > > > > Asserted lie. Did I mention you claim ALL APers lose?
> >
> > If you did, you should heed the words of truth.
>
> That's all I do, which demonstrates you constantly lie.

So you heed my words...good boy. Now repeat them and you'll be set
free!

RIV.

>
> > > >
> > > > Try to be wishy-washy....try to be vague or change the

issue.

> > > Either way you cut it, losers are always quick to point out

how

> > > they 'win'. And the ones who do offend repeatedly are the

ones

> > with the worst gambling problems.
> > >
> > > I do believe RIV has just explained that ROB is a loser.
> >
> > Sounds like you twisted your tongue on that one. Wanna try it
> again??
>
> Nope, everyone else can read.

Just as I did. You twisted it out of shape again. But you've bot
another shot at making snese.Go ahead, give it a try.

Looks like Rob went back and read my words again; found out they made
complete sense; and now makes a poor attempt to save face. How sweet
it is ...

>
> > > > You're lucky. you've got the truth coming at you here from
all
> > > around!
> > >
> > > Let me get this straight. You and Bob constitute "all

around"?

> > While
> > > the 6000 or so members of VPfree constitute what? LMAO. PS.
> > > teacuplily has already admitted he loses with your system. He
> just
> > > blames the casinos in AC instead of accepting the truth.
> >
> > It's written all over you. the only words you hear are from

those

> of us whom you want to emulate.
> > Teacup said what?
>
> Teacuplilly complained that he always loses in AC. He uses your
> system. He claims the machines are gaffed. You supported him.

Need

I say more?

That's funny. I've never heard of the teacup before and you know he
loses in AC and uses only my strategy? What'd you do, set up your
slide rule to take notes?

Lie. As proven by these references:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/3622
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/3628

Expect more babbling from the babblemaster.

> > > Then you are saying that skill is involved. You can't have it
> both ways. It can't be ALL LUCK, while admitting that decisions
must be made. You've gotten yourself into what is called a catch-22.
> >
> > Here's the same flash you get every day: A winning hand is
nothing but good luck, and a losing hand is nothing but bad luck.

no

skill involved.
>
> Then just keep hitting deal/draw. No sense holding any cards if
it's all luck. No sense in ANY special plays. Do you even have a

clue

how idiotic you sound?

Here's the dicker: "Get dealt two Aces and 3 junk cards, stop, make

a

decision on what the best hand to hold is, then hold it" Duh??

Why? You stated it was ALL LUCK. How can a human decision effect an
outcome that is ALL LUCK?

Could
it be the ACES?? You're so stupid AND IN SUCH DIRE NEED OF TRUE
GEEKNESS TAKING OVER THE EARTH THAT YOU make believe there's skill
involved when a chimp can do it. I hear the audience laughing at

you

from every part of the world that you want so much to be geek-like!

I think everyone can see from your babbling that you are stuck. A
catch-22 like I said. If you say it's all luck then you're left with
no way of responding to the continual deal/draw scenario. If you
claim holding certain cards is the way to go, then you are left with
the fact that it isn't all luck. Sorry, moron, but your babbling
can't get you out of this one.

>
> > You go into vp with a basic understanding of common sense
> > and you let the cards fall. The choice of what to hold is not a
> > decision--but common sense and nothing more. A monkey could be
> > trained to do it just as well as you.
>
> Common sense? If it is so common then why haven't the casinos all
> gone out of business? And, once again, why would it matter what

you

> hold if the results are pure luck anyway?

Huh? Here's a flash and a half: Holding obvious cards isn't the
result of being tapped on the shoulder by Einstein. It's common

sense

and is what everyone who plays tries to rely upon.

You claim you win, you claim common sense is all it takes. We all
know what common sense means, so you just stated that everyone should
win and the casinos should have gone out of business long ago. But,
the casinos are still in business. So, common sense must not be the
answer after all, and Robbie has made himself look foolish ... again.

The fantasy that
there's some kind of skill involved is a theoretical state of mind,
devoid of any and all reality. And the hold doesn't mean you'll

win.

If you're lucky you will. If you're unlucky you won't. How much
simpler can it get for such a geeky simpleton??

It WAS very simple to prove your assertion was ridiculous.

>> > How much you selling those comfy blankeys for---or does the
price rise after every losing session??!

> I don't sell anything. That's why I'm believable and you're not.

I

> have nothing to gain or lose while your job, your books, your

life

is based on a lie. Admit the lie and you're back on the streets. I
> understand WHY you run your con, it's still not right.

So how much you selling that crybaby rant for??

LMAO. Ever notice when Robbie gets stuck he likes to use a variation
of "cry"? That's RIV in action.

[rgmustain]

> > > As is the case here where Rob tried to lie and say my analogy

was

> > > about "golf balls". It appears he's still rattled.

> > Wordy explanations again as you try to babble your way out.
> > Sorry.....

I have to laugh at little dicky and feel sorry for him at the same
time. He went thru this wasting time posting his nonsense every time

I

commanded him to, yet all I needed to do was delete the whole thing
simply because I gave him a fresh start on another post that explains
the knowledge he lacks. What a dufus!

Rob, just admitted that he lost another one. This must be his new
approach to looking foolish. By the way, Rob, let me explain what you
gained by deleting my response that PROVED you are a worthless LIAR ...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/4108

... Nothing. Here it is again for everyone to read.

···

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

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

[Rob_Singer1]

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > > > > > > Face it, little dicky. He doesn't want to have a back
and
> > > forth
> > > > > > with illogic because he has better things to do--like
work.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think that's up for him to decide.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yup, and the neurotic in you didn't listen.
> > > >
> > > > He did respond. I guess that pretty much negates Rob's
comment.
> > >
> > > All except for the fact that the neurotic in you didn't
> > > listen....and the wee fact that he told you how tiresome

you've

> > > become.....
> >
> > If he answers a post then he invites a response. Do I have to
> explain to you how public forums work ... again? It's only been a
few
> days since the last time.
>
> Did I mention the word 'neurotic'?

This coming from a person that has to respond to every post on this
forum ... pot-kettle-black.

pot-kettle-black? What's that one mean?? I don't know whether to
laugh or call up Salem and get the local witch to explain it to me!
Oh, and I believe you know why I reply to as many posts as possible
here: To get your goat! And guess what--You comply EVERY TIME!
HAHAHAHA!! The puppetmaster at his best!
  

> > > > > Maybe the problem lies in your intelligence level. Maybe
you
> > > just don't have what he & I have when it comes to recognizing
> > cycles at the machines!
> > > >
> > > > Or, maybe there aren't any and neither one of you

understand randomness.

> > >
> > > Yup--you just confirmed the reason---It's your intelligence
level that's the culprit here.
> >
> > OK, please explain what random means.
>
> It means whatever it is you want it to mean....otherwise,
regardless
> of the expertise that lies behind anything else, you're in total
> denial.

LMAO. That answers the question of intellegence.

....and of your denial too. One neatly wrapped package with your name
all over the front.

>
> > > > > And when my suspicions were verified by the SW engineer
> > > > > at IGT, the smartest among us listened to me.
> > >
> > > > Give us his name. What? No name ... again? This "inside

info"

> con is getting very tiring.
> > >
> > > I'll tell you what. I'll SELL you his name, number and even

his

> > home address. $10,000.
> >
> > Did I mention it was a con ... Proof positive.
>
> Positive? You got the money I got the name!

I got lots of money, you got con. Me too smart to fall for it.

Just how is paying for a name a 'con'? You get the name, talk to him,
then pay. Or are you saying you're afraid of that reality stick
hitting you once again.....

> > > > > That simply confirms
> > > > > what I've been saying all along--you and Dancer and the
rest
> of the make-believe artists don't win a thing.
> > > >
> > > > Asserted lie. I win. Is this RIV pointing out that Rob has
been
> > > lying to us all along?
> > >
> > > You're a big loser and you know it.
> >
> > Asserted lie. But, still indicative that Rob has been lying all
> along about his results.
>
> If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done it by

now.

What more proof do you need? My bank account is an open book.

??? That's proof of what??? C'mon. Prove it by documenting every
session, bank withdrawal, deposit, tax return, and casino/IRS record
that you keep. Not too hard to do, is it? C'mon little dicky--here's
your chance to wipe all that egg off your face. Show the proof you
claim no one else ever does.

> Instead, you choose to suffer through what to a geek must be
> unbearable embarrassment.

RIV. And clearly indicative of Rob's position at this time. He's

been

caught in so many lies that I've lost track. He quits responding to
those thread while jumping in and mentioning my name every time he
posts. I wonder if he realizes this justs adds to his embarrassment?

The more you bring it up the more you show how much you enjoy the
ridiculing you get! And I'm just the guy for the job!!

> > > Play $2million of coin thru at a theoretical 1.2% 'edge',
> > > lose $55,000....but lo and behold, you can tell the world

that

> > > you've WON a sweet $24,000 because that's what the numbers

say

> you should have won with that 'edge'.
> >
> > Is this supposed to be your personal results. Sounds reasonable
> > except for the missing minus sign (-1.2%).
>
> Phantom bucks either way....but a way out for the gurus and the
likes of you, who make believe they're the winners of the year

every year with such nonsense.

> >
> > > You can even throw a few thousand
> > > in there because you played 'tournaments'...and lost them

too. It's like a bunch of clowns being ripped a new one by me week
after week after week.

> >
> > Yup. I can hear the moans ... wait, I didn't hear any. Could
this
> be another lie? Well, of course it is. Rob couldn't go down

without

> > throwing in a few idiotic assertions.
>
> Exactly what I mean when you are getting ripped a new one. Kinda
> makes you hold your breath, doesn't it!

It makes you look impotent and stupid. Works for me.

Did that come directly out of where I ripped you a new one?

> He left you with some common sense and some reality. Truly,

foreign entities to a theorist wearing blinders.

Once more Rob avoids providing any reasonable process; asserts some
nonsense; and runs away and hides. Wait, I think I just detected
another pattern, tell me Robbie, what should I hold?

You're Robbie isn't hiding, to your discomfort little dickey.... He's
right here, constantly belittling you and commanding you do do my
every beck & call.....
  

> > > To say he wins because of some
> > > > nebulous claim of detecting patterns is about the same as
> > claiming hitting the hold button a few times increases wins.
> Actually, the latter is a definable and testable process. It's
worth
> more.
> > >
> > > Um....not a good effort there, little dicky. You don't
understand it and obviously don't have his talent. Save your

dignity and just admit it.

> >
> > Robbie can't refute my logic once again. RIV steps in and tells
us why.

And here it is again! You just can't handle it when told of another
human being living that has more intelligence than you and it's
PROVEN! And there I am....watching you hurt and enjoying the agony!

>
> When all you can come up with is 'hit the hold button' the flow

of illogic begins to overpower. Save your dignity....heed those words.

No, what I came up with is a process that is one-step better than a
mythical pattern detection one. It has a process (however
worthless) , you have none.

"The process of 'hit the hold button'. MY, what GENIUS! I'm sensing
more and more envy with every foot you stick in your mouth. And
you're reaching for them now!

>
> > > > The only thing I've seen so far is an unverifiable claim.
Even
> > > Bob isn't sure he hasn't simply been lucky.
> > >
> > > Then it all went right thru that big ol' hole in your head
again.
> > He
> > > says he's been lucky, and even luckier when he applies his
> pattern-detection skills. but that hurts you, doesn't it.
> >
> > Doesn't have any effect on me.
>
> Of course not, and he predicted it wouldn't because of your bias
and geek-logic long ago.

Sorry, little man, I've already said I believe Bob has won.

Um, if you have to change the subject to feel better after being
slapped down and kicked, better keep doing it with your wife.

What is

unverifiable is whether his undefinable special plays had any part

in

it. You'd think that someone who claims no one will listen to him
would jump at the chance to discuss them. Instead he runs away and
refuses to discuss them. The only logical conclusion anyone can get
out of this is he has no idea whether these "unorthodox" plays have
had any impact on his results.

Here's a news flash specifically for little dicky: HE CAME ON,
EXPLAINED IT ALL, IT MADE PERFECT SENSE TO THOSE WHO WANTED TO
UNDERSTAND IT, THEN HE LEFT SAYING GEEKS LIKE YOU WOULD NEVER GET IT
ANYWAY. Seems like he took your self-labeled 'genius' label away from
you in plain sight!

> > > > > So how in the world do you expect anyone to lay it out

for

> you--
> > -
> Simple. Write down the process.
> > >
> > > That's funny.....I've already read what he wrote and I
understand it. Now where'd you say you went to school?
> >
> > OK, you write down the process.
>
> How about "OK, YOU go back and READ the process"!

Can't do it, can you? I rest my case.

I don't want to do your work. You have the problem, fix it.

> > > > > with
> > > > > the Queen doing a strip-tease at one end and Paymar
counting
> > > sheep at the other? Nothing's verifiable to you FOR REAL. All
you
> > > know is theory, and this ain't about that.
> > >
> > > > It's about a claimed method for forecasting future hands on

a

> VP machine. You and Bob claim this capability, but provide no way
to
> > > > substantiate your claims.
> > >
> > > Sorry for embarrassing you AGAIN, Einstein....but my way and
his
> > way of substantiating our claims is by how much we've won.
> >
> > Meaningless. If you haven't kept track of all your special

plays

> then we have no way of determining how much they've helped (or
hurt)
> your overall results.

Cat got your tongue?

What tongue?? You've seen all the clear explanations, and the geek in
you rejects them. We're right/you're wrong. simple as that. Since it
bothers you so, go take it out on your wife like you probably do all
the time. It's almost impossible to visualize the sufferring she must
go thru with you. You're soooo neurotic, in need of documentation on
every issue that fits YOUR agenda, and when you & she argue, you
remain in a state of denial that she's right. Man, you must have her
trapped in some kind of bizzare relationship!

> >
> > > Not good
> > > enough for the geek? Then write down EXACTLY your rendition

of

> > > detailed 'substantiation' would be.
> >
> > Already done.
>
> And it is?

You've been reading it for a couple of days now. Write down the
process and we'll get a group together to use it and track the
results. It so simple a cave man could figure it out (sorry geico).

"sorry GEICO??" Huh? How corny can you be??? So drop the stall and
let's see it.

> >
> > > And while you're at it, prove to
> > > us that you 'win' with your nerd method by providing

verifiable

> > > substantiation that it has indeed happened as you claim it

has.

> > Then
> > > I'll do the same and I'm sure Bob will too!
> >
> > Sorry, moron, but this has been covered ad nausium. No

individual

> > results are meaningful. It's like saying one at bat by a

baseball

> > player constitutes proof of his skill. However, if you think

it's

> so important then provide us with the PROOF that you have won.
>
> So when challenged to provide exactly what you challenge another

to

> supply, you deek out thru one of your famous escape routes.

You'll

> all class, little dicky.

Whatsa matta, chicken man, the truth hurts? Let's see YOUR results.
YOU brought it up. PROVE that you have won.

Now you're asking for MY results again? Why, you want to be
embarrassed again?? Just prove you win and I'll save you the anger of
seeing REAL results.

>
> PS,
> > anyone who wants to see my bank statments is more than welcome.
>
> I want to see them....and then you can explain to me how the
entries
> correlate to the gambling fever you have.

I wonder if this qualifies for "Cat got your tongue"?!!

>
> > > For all we know Bob is psychic( and
> > > > doesn't realize this is the reason for his turn around. Of
> > course,
> > > > this would be worthless to anyone else.
> > >
> > > What you do know is that I'M psychic. I can see right through
you
> > > all the time.
> >
> > Is that why you make yourself look foolish so often? It must be
> > that "gofer goof ball" in you that does it.
>
> Right thru you, little dicky....right thru you.

LMAO. Is that why you quit responding to the threads where I
demonstrate that you have lied? You better get those eyes checked
out.

That doesn't make sense…again. First, I 'quit responding because I
lied' then "I couldn't read what you wrote"! You're so confused right
now you don't know whether you're coming or going! Kinda just a tad
bit different than that MANLY control you exert over your poor addict
wife, huh???

> > > lets see.....$99,875 (no tip of course) when in reality, he
> > > calculates it out to a $125 loss. Go ahead. Call me stupid

one

> more time, because now that you have a dozen eggs on your face,

you

> > > certainly don't have any other words to chime in with on THIS
one!
>
> > If you think being lucky constitutes intelligence, then you are
far more stupid than I can put into words.

Being smart constitutes intelligence....as in taking the win home and
not worrying about your phantom bucks. Being a pessimist is just
another trait of a pathological losing gambler. You're an open, silly
but sad book.

>
> Being lucky thru the use of intelligent special plays. Sorry, but
you can cry all you want.

Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

Not surprising. It goes right thru that geek armor and to the heart
of the matter.

> > We're talking about special plays and I wouldn't waste my time
> > reading yours. Is that 4th grade reading comprehension you're
> > displaying?
>
> Oh that's right. You've already admitted not really knowing what
they
> entail. Oh dear.

I know all I need to know.

The typical reply from the person who is desperately trying to end
the discussion before he looks too stupid.

You advocate making a negative play. What

more is there? It's equivalent to telling a baseball player to

swing

at a few pitches with his eyes closed because he might get lucky.
Sure, it could happen, but over time it's a losing plan.

A "negitive play" according to little dicky: Dealt QQQAK with 2-to-
the-royal. Hold AKQ, win $100,000. THAT'S QUITE THE NEGATIVE PLAY,
HEY GOOFBALL!!!!!!!!!!!! You're really a vp clown, right?

> > > then read Bob's post one more time. Then you have permission
> > > to take a cold shower.
> >
> > Why? It still provides no information. Do you

think "unorthodox" conveys any usable information? Is your brain
permanently damaged?

ANY information would seem to be useful whether you understand it or
not. You clearly have trouble opening up and taking in any info
transfer unless it's an exact fit for your thin pipeline. And this is
exactly why you should be in the cold shower right
about now!

> > > I thought you read my strategies....man, you really didn't!
> >
> > I've told you many times I haven't read your strategies. Did

the

> part
> > about wasting my time escape you? Didn't I mention Reid's

proof,

> that
> > no progression can effect the payback of game, enough times? Is
> your
> > brain damaged? I based my sim on your explanation in this forum.
>
> So why talk about 'special plays' if you both haven't read my
> strategy,

I already answer this above. How many baseball players would try
keeping their eyes closed? It's obviously a losing proposition ...
just like your special plays. I don't need to waste time reading

your

special play nonsense to know that it's nonsense. To make matters
even worse for you, you 've mentioned a few of them here, proving
beyond any doubt that they are indeed con-man nonsense.

I didn't even read that nonsense. as soon as I saw you desperately
reaching for straws again with 'baseball players' I knew it was a
feel-good rant.

> > > > > So now Bob's a liar too--only you're refraining from
calling him that??
> > > >
> > > > I assume he either misread or misinterpreted or, another

very

> > > likely situation, the writer was confused. We've certainly

seen

> > that
> > > in most of Rob's writings.
> > >
> > > Of course he was confused, little dicky.....of COURSE he was!
No
> > one
> > > could ever POSSIBLY have more insight and knowledge than our
own
> > > little dicky.....
> >
> > Not in this area. They might have equivalent knowledge, but not
> more.
>
> Ah-ha HAHAHA!! Help me someone--I'm ready to pass out friom
> LAUGHTER!!!!!

RIV. Rob's been caught trying to sound important as another
embarrassing moment approaches.

A geek who thinks no one knows more than him....in a world full of
geeks!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!!

>
> > Computers are really simple tools.
>
> So THAT's why you chose that field.....

Simple, powerful and requiring significant creativeness to get the
most out them.

A complete turnaround in the claim once the master inputs! Truly, a
hypocritical bozo at work.

>
> >They do what they are programmed
> > to do. To make a statement like Bob did is nonsense to even a
> novice programmer. And, I already explained exactly how mirror
> results could occur. You're being foolish again, little man.
>
> This is so funny. You're being humiliated in your own field, and
the
> best part is, you're BURYING YOURSELF with every word you write!

Of course I am ... as Robbie's embarrassment builds.

This is almost too funny! He's being made a fool of by anyone and
everyone IN HIS OWN FIELD that he claims he's the expert's expert
at....and he still plays the boy on the whipping post!!!
HAHAHAHAHA!!! somebody PLEASE help me before my gut SPLITS!!!!!!!!!!!
   

> > > > > Is everyone supposed to be stupid and ignorant without
> > > > > knowledge of anything pertinent except you?
> > >
> > > > In this case, it appears so. I know what I'm talking about
and
> > > could write a coin-flip simulator in less that a day myself.
All
> it
> > > would take is deleting a lot of code from my VP simulator.
> > >
> > > You apparently don't know as much as you think you do. Bob
> wouldn't lie about that because he has no reason to.
>
> > Like I said, there are several possible reasons for his
confusion,
> > lying is your game.
>
> So now he's not lying. Which is it?

I see, you want to get a jump on your embarrassment. OK, if you go
back and look at my response, I said "lying is your game". LMAO.
Don't you understand that "your" refers to you, moron. Your poor
reading skills have done you in once again.

Your usual and perpetually baseless "go back and look" nonsense.
Those of us who have reading comprehension have zero need to 'go
back' like an unsure geek would do. Oh my God, are you for real???

> All we see here is your covering
> your butt by saying "no one can do it better'. Well, genius,

looks

> like you've been trumped. Here's some words I'm sure you've heard
> many-a time "YOU'RE FIRED!"

Still LMAO. You make an idiotic blunder and then RIV makes you look
even more foolish. I love it. I wonder what Donald would say to you
now?

YOU'RE FIRED!!! I wouldn't even pay you for time worked because you
faked it.

> >
> > > I make you look small
> > > enough by firing a truth barrage at you every day. Accept the
> fact that you were one-upped this time,
> >
> > OK, tell you what. I'll bet you $10,000 that I can produce a
> program
> > that correctly simulates a coin toss using a standard PRNG and
> > produces results favoring either heads and tails. You can have
> > anybody you want check the code and I will change it if they

find

a
> > problem. How about it? ... Now, you know how it really feels to
> > be "one-upped".
>
> Hmmmm....I did a little research on this while you were

scrambling

> around trying to figure out how to respond to all the logic

you're

> made to take in. I found out that the 'head' side had slighty
higher
> weight in every coin except 50c. Are you capable of programming
that
> in?

ROTFLMAO. Sorry, while I take a break and catch my breath. This is
where Rob faces TOTAL humiliation. If the head has a "slighty

higher

weight" then we all know it will come up more. The larger the

weight

the more it will come up. We also know that is NOT what Bob stated.
He just said a "coin toss". Everyone reading his post understood

that

he meant a FAIR coin toss, otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned the
small .002% variation. You've really stuck your nose in it now. How
does it smell?

HELLO McFLY??!! Ther is a SLIGHTLY HIGHER WEIGHT on the head side
whether you like it or not! Is that why you're in such a defensive
posture--you have to actually input the CORRECT parameters and you
don't want to??? What a fake!

>
> > > go in the corner and give it a
> > > good cry, call your mommy and maybe she'll listen to you,

then

> come back and face the world like a man.
> >
> > RIV.
>
> Waaa....waaa..cry me a river!

I think you can handle that. How does it feel to be so outclassed?

You just proved to all how you operate. With a simple program on a
coin flip you can't do it properly. Oh Jehovah, help this poor man....

> > > > > He just told you....AGAIN. He 'discerns' short-term
patterns.
> > > Some people just may have that ability--even if you don't.
> > > >
> > > > If "some people" have this ability then why can't they
explain
> it?
> > >
> > > I explained mine and he explained his.
> >
> > No, you have provided no repeatable process. You only claim it
like
> a typical con man. Put up or shut up.
>
> It's all been explained and said, little dicky. You can't accept
it,
> then like I said, cry me a river.....

Still waiting for that process. How sweet it is ...

Cry cry cry....like a little lost boy. It'll do you good.

> >
> > > What more do you want--us to
> > > act like geeks at the machines and record evey hand and card
> > > occurrence?
> >
> > It has nothing to do with recording results. Your brain is
damaged,
> > isn't it? ... All you have to write down the steps that you
follow
> in recognizing the "pattern" and then define how that effects

your

> > future plays.
>
> HELLO Einstein & McFLY!! The 'pattern' only shows up at the
machines
> and there are no 'steps' to it unless and until the machine
performs.

Give me a second, but I just can't stop laughing. How many times

have

you used this con man BS? "I can't explain it to you, but TRUST

me".

Rob, you are hilarious and I'm sure that RIV is celebrating.

You'll need more than a second to read it right. By now,
any 'programmer' who had any idea would know pattern recognition. and
you complain that I continue to say "You're FIRED"? Just be happy you
never had to face me in your working days. What a fake!!

> All the intelligent gambler need do is follow the card
sequences/hand
> occurrences and the answer is right there. You can't do it? Then
cry
> me another river.

Just follow the UNDEFINED "card sequences/hand occurrences". Isn't
this exactly like my student/Robbie example I gave last time? This

is so funny, I am totally amazed a grown man could be this stupid.

As Bob said, geeks would never want to understand the process so
they'll reject any and all efforts to do it. You're your own worst
enemy, little dicky. you're fighting yourself over this and you don't
ever want to come to a conclusion. It'll just hurt too much for the
pain-hating geek to handle.

> >
> > > > > And just how
> > > > > does one go about 'testing and verifying' what he says he
> does anyway?
> > > >
> > > > Simple. Get a group of people to try it and report their
> results. I'm willing to try it at low denoms. All I need is the
> process.
> > >
> > > HAHAHAHAHA!! You mean like in a gang-bang video poker

marathon?

> > > Here's your process: put the money in, play the hands, and if
you
> > > have the talent to detect patterns then you will. Very simple.
> >
> > This is all I wanted you to admit. You have no process. You

can't

> > explain it to anyone. Typical con man BS. We've seen it all
before.
>
> It's all right there, little dicky. Accept it or cry me a

river.....

We all know who's crying right now. And, also, that you will never
admit it.

Cry that river and be done. I promise to stop stomping all over you
if you do!

> >
> > Robbie: Go ahead and detect the patterns.
> > Student: How do I do that?
> > Robbie: Uh, just do it like I said.
> > Student: You didn't say anything.
> > Robbie: Boy are you stupid. I guess some students can't be

taught.

>
> Student: You're right Robbie. Now where do you want me to cry

you a river?

>
> > > Too bad little dicky. Whenever you go into that tirade all
you're doing is slapping the "I am a sap" sticker on your forehead

for all the world to see.

> >
> > I see, now your speaking for both Bob and CF. I wonder how they
> like that? Hey guys, don't bother posting any more. Rob has read
your
> > minds and will take over from here.
>
> You're right. They'll say the same as me.

Is that right? Bob and CF, would you say the same things Rob has

said

in this post? Bob, did you really mean "weighted coin toss" but
forgot to mention it?

> You have this weak tirade
> going on and all you can do is rant and then cry. Never any

facts. All accusations simply because you feel inferior and you like

crying in the rain.You have yet to find a way to protect you from

the undeniable truth. I wish I could say I feel your pain....but

you so deservedly get the whole enchilada every time you ask for it.

If I lost all the time as you claim, then my bank account should be
dwindling. Instead it keeps going up. So, do you want to see my

bank account or would you rather keep making foolish claims? We all
know the answer to this one.

Sounds like a trick the Queen uses. Keep 'borrowing' from her and the
boy friend's 401k, stuff the bank account so there's always plenty of
gambling money around, then piss it away on the machines. Yup, you've
got something to be proud of there allright! All you addicts are the
same. You lose all year, then claim 'you've won because you had the
advantage' every time you played! When you lose you never lose, and
when you win you lose it all back anyway because you have that A-D-V-
A-N-T-A-G-E. Clown video poker at its best!!

···

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

[Rob_Singer1]

LIAR …http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/4108…
Nothing. Here it is again for everyone to read.

I know I know, you depend on these long, messy threads to try and
confuse anyone who reads them. And when you're wordy--which is not the
norm for a geek--we all see how nervous you are in your quest to make
yourself feel at least half-confident after you've been flogged in
public yet again. I suggest for that good feeling of being superior, bo
on back in and boss your wife around again. That'll get your
confidence back up there, for sure! Make believe she's me and it'll
climb that much faster. Go ahead---give it your best shot like you do
all the time! Never mind you've never had the upper hand with me.
Just "make believe" (now that's not hard for a pathological addict to
do, is it???) you're pushing a REAL MAN around and you'll be set free!!

···

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

Rob, just admitted that he lost another one. This must be his new
approach to looking foolish. By the way, Rob, let me explain what you
gained by deleting my response that PROVED you are a worthless

[rgmustain]

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

> > Did I mention the word 'neurotic'?
>
> This coming from a person that has to respond to every post on

this

> forum ... pot-kettle-black.

pot-kettle-black? What's that one mean??

This as been explained to you before. Search the archives.

I don't know whether to
laugh or call up Salem and get the local witch to explain it to me!
Oh, and I believe you know why I reply to as many posts as possible
here: To get your goat! And guess what--You comply EVERY TIME!
HAHAHAHA!! The puppetmaster at his best!

Seems strange that you would claim credit for having me expose your
lies and con. So be it.

> > > > > > And when my suspicions were verified by the SW engineer
> > > > > > at IGT, the smartest among us listened to me.
> > > >
> > > > > Give us his name. What? No name ... again? This "inside
info"
> > con is getting very tiring.
> > > >
> > > > I'll tell you what. I'll SELL you his name, number and even
his
> > > home address. $10,000.
> > >
> > > Did I mention it was a con ... Proof positive.
> >
> > Positive? You got the money I got the name!
>
> I got lots of money, you got con. Me too smart to fall for it.

Just how is paying for a name a 'con'?

Because it's of NO value. That's why it's called a con.

You get the name, talk to him,
then pay. Or are you saying you're afraid of that reality stick
hitting you once again.....

You're the one claiming all this BS. If you can't back it up then YOU
are the one that's afraid. PS. If you had a name you would post it.

> > > > > > That simply confirms
> > > > > > what I've been saying all along--you and Dancer and the
> rest
> > of the make-believe artists don't win a thing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Asserted lie. I win. Is this RIV pointing out that Rob

has

> been
> > > > lying to us all along?
> > > >
> > > > You're a big loser and you know it.
> > >
> > > Asserted lie. But, still indicative that Rob has been lying

all

> > along about his results.
> >
> > If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done it by
now.
>
> What more proof do you need? My bank account is an open book.

??? That's proof of what??? C'mon. Prove it by documenting every
session, bank withdrawal, deposit, tax return, and casino/IRS

record

that you keep. Not too hard to do, is it?

Nope. I have them all. I'll let you see them ALL for $10,000 and an
admission that I have won exactly as I've claimed.

C'mon little dicky--here's
your chance to wipe all that egg off your face. Show the proof you
claim no one else ever does.

No problem. Get the cash together

> > Instead, you choose to suffer through what to a geek must be
> > unbearable embarrassment.
>
> RIV. And clearly indicative of Rob's position at this time. He's
been
> caught in so many lies that I've lost track. He quits responding

to

> those thread while jumping in and mentioning my name every time

he

> posts. I wonder if he realizes this justs adds to his

embarrassment?

The more you bring it up the more you show how much you enjoy the
ridiculing you get! And I'm just the guy for the job!!

Doesn't appear that way. You've been running away from my proof of
your lies for the last week.

> > > > You can even throw a few thousand
> > > > in there because you played 'tournaments'...and lost them
too. It's like a bunch of clowns being ripped a new one by me week
after week after week.
> > >
> > > Yup. I can hear the moans ... wait, I didn't hear any. Could
> this
> > be another lie? Well, of course it is. Rob couldn't go down
without
> > > throwing in a few idiotic assertions.
> >
> > Exactly what I mean when you are getting ripped a new one.

Kinda

> > makes you hold your breath, doesn't it!
>
> It makes you look impotent and stupid. Works for me.

Did that come directly out of where I ripped you a new one?

No, it came from the big hole I ripped in your con. The big
difference is ... my statement is true.

> > He left you with some common sense and some reality. Truly,
foreign entities to a theorist wearing blinders.
>
> Once more Rob avoids providing any reasonable process; asserts

some

> nonsense; and runs away and hides. Wait, I think I just detected
> another pattern, tell me Robbie, what should I hold?

You're Robbie isn't hiding, to your discomfort little dickey....

He's

right here, constantly belittling you and commanding you do do my
every beck & call.....

But, Rob, I saw a pattern and you didn't tell me what to hold. Gee,
what a disappointment.

> > > > To say he wins because of some
> > > > > nebulous claim of detecting patterns is about the same as
> > > claiming hitting the hold button a few times increases wins.
> > Actually, the latter is a definable and testable process. It's
> worth
> > more.
> > > >
> > > > Um....not a good effort there, little dicky. You don't
> understand it and obviously don't have his talent. Save your
dignity and just admit it.
> > >
> > > Robbie can't refute my logic once again. RIV steps in and

tells

> us why.

And here it is again! You just can't handle it when told of another
human being living that has more intelligence than you and it's
PROVEN!

Is this the same intelligence that came up with "golf balls" or
the "coin flip" BS? Need I say more.

And there I am....watching you hurt and enjoying the agony!

RIV.

> >
> > When all you can come up with is 'hit the hold button' the flow
of illogic begins to overpower. Save your dignity....heed those

words.

>
> No, what I came up with is a process that is one-step better than

a

> mythical pattern detection one. It has a process (however
> worthless) , you have none.

"The process of 'hit the hold button'. MY, what GENIUS!

And that puts you where .... One step below.

I'm sensing
more and more envy with every foot you stick in your mouth. And
you're reaching for them now!

You're scrambling on every post. You duck every factual statement and
assert more BS. It's good to see you behave this way. It's most
likely a preamble to your next exit.

>
> >
> > > > > The only thing I've seen so far is an unverifiable claim.
> Even
> > > > Bob isn't sure he hasn't simply been lucky.
> > > >
> > > > Then it all went right thru that big ol' hole in your head
> again.
> > > He
> > > > says he's been lucky, and even luckier when he applies his
> > pattern-detection skills. but that hurts you, doesn't it.
> > >
> > > Doesn't have any effect on me.
> >
> > Of course not, and he predicted it wouldn't because of your

bias

> and geek-logic long ago.
>
> Sorry, little man, I've already said I believe Bob has won.

Um, if you have to change the subject to feel better after being
slapped down and kicked, better keep doing it with your wife.

RIV.

What is
> unverifiable is whether his undefinable special plays had any

part

in
> it. You'd think that someone who claims no one will listen to him
> would jump at the chance to discuss them. Instead he runs away

and

> refuses to discuss them. The only logical conclusion anyone can

get

> out of this is he has no idea whether these "unorthodox" plays

have

> had any impact on his results.

Here's a news flash specifically for little dicky: HE CAME ON,
EXPLAINED IT ALL,

Still waiting for you to write it down. If he "EXPLAINED IT ALL",
this should be a trivial task.

IT MADE PERFECT SENSE TO THOSE WHO WANTED TO
UNDERSTAND IT,

And you still can't write it down.

THEN HE LEFT SAYING GEEKS LIKE YOU WOULD NEVER GET IT
ANYWAY.

Lie, he never said that.

Seems like he took your self-labeled 'genius' label away from
you in plain sight!

He comes in and claims a pattern detection theory. Never says how he
does it and exits quickly ducking every question regarding his
approach ... You are looking more foolish by the moment.

>
> > > > > > So how in the world do you expect anyone to lay it out
for
> > you--
> > > -
> > Simple. Write down the process.
> > > >
> > > > That's funny.....I've already read what he wrote and I
> understand it. Now where'd you say you went to school?
> > >
> > > OK, you write down the process.
> >
> > How about "OK, YOU go back and READ the process"!
>
> Can't do it, can you? I rest my case.

I don't want to do your work. You have the problem, fix it.

I have no problem. You've claimed he has a process. You've claimed
you understand this process. You can't write it down. Even a cave man
could see the the contradiction in your story.

>
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > the Queen doing a strip-tease at one end and Paymar
> counting
> > > > sheep at the other? Nothing's verifiable to you FOR REAL.

All

> you
> > > > know is theory, and this ain't about that.
> > > >
> > > > > It's about a claimed method for forecasting future hands

on

a
> > VP machine. You and Bob claim this capability, but provide no

way

> to
> > > > > substantiate your claims.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for embarrassing you AGAIN, Einstein....but my way

and

> his
> > > way of substantiating our claims is by how much we've won.
> > >
> > > Meaningless. If you haven't kept track of all your special
plays
> > then we have no way of determining how much they've helped (or
> hurt)
> > your overall results.
>
> Cat got your tongue?

What tongue?? You've seen all the clear explanations, and the geek

in

you rejects them. We're right/you're wrong. simple as that. Since

it

bothers you so, go take it out on your wife like you probably do

all

the time. It's almost impossible to visualize the sufferring she

must

go thru with you. You're soooo neurotic, in need of documentation

on

every issue that fits YOUR agenda, and when you & she argue, you
remain in a state of denial that she's right. Man, you must have

her

trapped in some kind of bizzare relationship!

LMAO. Intense babbling always means RIV is getting his way.

>
> > >
> > > > Not good
> > > > enough for the geek? Then write down EXACTLY your rendition
of
> > > > detailed 'substantiation' would be.
> > >
> > > Already done.
> >
> > And it is?
>
> You've been reading it for a couple of days now. Write down the
> process and we'll get a group together to use it and track the
> results. It so simple a cave man could figure it out (sorry

geico).

"sorry GEICO??" Huh? How corny can you be??? So drop the stall and
let's see it.

I just did, moron. Go back to the 4th grade ... and this time pay
attention.

>
> > >
> > > > And while you're at it, prove to
> > > > us that you 'win' with your nerd method by providing
verifiable
> > > > substantiation that it has indeed happened as you claim it
has.
> > > Then
> > > > I'll do the same and I'm sure Bob will too!
> > >
> > > Sorry, moron, but this has been covered ad nausium. No
individual
> > > results are meaningful. It's like saying one at bat by a
baseball
> > > player constitutes proof of his skill. However, if you think
it's
> > so important then provide us with the PROOF that you have won.
> >
> > So when challenged to provide exactly what you challenge

another

to
> > supply, you deek out thru one of your famous escape routes.
You'll
> > all class, little dicky.
>
> Whatsa matta, chicken man, the truth hurts? Let's see YOUR

results.

> YOU brought it up. PROVE that you have won.

Now you're asking for MY results again? Why, you want to be
embarrassed again?? Just prove you win and I'll save you the anger

of

seeing REAL results.

Backing down? In front of everyone? This is not like you Robbie.
Could it be your publisher TOLD you to stop the betting or hit the
road? Now, you have nothing to fall back on. Come on, chicken-man,
you started this, show us your results. I've already offered up mine
to you.

>
> >
> > PS,
> > > anyone who wants to see my bank statments is more than

welcome.

> >
> > I want to see them....and then you can explain to me how the
> entries
> > correlate to the gambling fever you have.

I wonder if this qualifies for "Cat got your tongue"?!!

The offer is on the table. All it takes is a measly $10K.

> >
> > > > For all we know Bob is psychic( and
> > > > > doesn't realize this is the reason for his turn around.

Of

> > > course,
> > > > > this would be worthless to anyone else.
> > > >
> > > > What you do know is that I'M psychic. I can see right

through

> you
> > > > all the time.
> > >
> > > Is that why you make yourself look foolish so often? It must

be

> > > that "gofer goof ball" in you that does it.
> >
> > Right thru you, little dicky....right thru you.
>
> LMAO. Is that why you quit responding to the threads where I
> demonstrate that you have lied? You better get those eyes checked
> out.

That doesn't make sense....again. First, I 'quit responding because

I

lied'

Yes, that you did. Glad to see you admit it.

then "I couldn't read what you wrote"!

Sorry, I didn't write that. Your damaged brain must be short
circuiting as well.

You're so confused right
now

I think it's pretty clear who's confused.

you don't know whether you're coming or going! Kinda just a tad
bit different than that MANLY control you exert over your poor

addict

wife, huh???

RIV.

>
> > > > lets see.....$99,875 (no tip of course) when in reality, he
> > > > calculates it out to a $125 loss. Go ahead. Call me stupid
one
> > more time, because now that you have a dozen eggs on your face,
you
> > > > certainly don't have any other words to chime in with on

THIS

> one!
> >
> > > If you think being lucky constitutes intelligence, then you

are

> far more stupid than I can put into words.

Being smart constitutes intelligence....as in taking the win home

and

not worrying about your phantom bucks. Being a pessimist is just
another trait of a pathological losing gambler. You're an open,

silly

but sad book.

You already responded to this statement before. Are you drinking this
early in the day again?

> >
> > Being lucky thru the use of intelligent special plays. Sorry,

but

> you can cry all you want.
>
> Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

Not surprising. It goes right thru that geek armor and to the heart
of the matter.

RIV. Making idiotic plays is at the very heart of your con, that much
is true.

>
> > > We're talking about special plays and I wouldn't waste my

time

> > > reading yours. Is that 4th grade reading comprehension you're
> > > displaying?
> >
> > Oh that's right. You've already admitted not really knowing

what

> they
> > entail. Oh dear.
>
> I know all I need to know.

The typical reply from the person who is desperately trying to end
the discussion before he looks too stupid.

RIV.

You advocate making a negative play. What
> more is there? It's equivalent to telling a baseball player to
swing
> at a few pitches with his eyes closed because he might get lucky.
> Sure, it could happen, but over time it's a losing plan.

A "negitive play" according to little dicky: Dealt QQQAK with 2-to-
the-royal. Hold AKQ, win $100,000. THAT'S QUITE THE NEGATIVE PLAY,
HEY GOOFBALL!!!!!!!!!!!! You're really a vp clown, right?

Anyone can make up a story like that. The number of times you've been
caught in lies this week alone makes it very obvious this NEVER
happened. Not to mention that you would hit this 1 out of 1081 tries
on average. In that time, playing $25 9-6 DDB (or equivalent) you
would end up losing over $540000 by making this play. I think you
should try another lie. So, back to the baseball analogy. Let's hear
you scramble some more.

> > > > then read Bob's post one more time. Then you have

permission

> > > > to take a cold shower.
> > >
> > > Why? It still provides no information. Do you
think "unorthodox" conveys any usable information? Is your brain
permanently damaged?

ANY information would seem to be useful whether you understand it

or

not.

Then provide some.

You clearly have trouble opening up and taking in any info
transfer unless it's an exact fit for your thin pipeline.

It can't fit in any pipeline until you provide it.

And this is
exactly why you should be in the cold shower right
about now!

RIV.

>
> > > > I thought you read my strategies....man, you really didn't!
> > >
> > > I've told you many times I haven't read your strategies. Did
the
> > part
> > > about wasting my time escape you? Didn't I mention Reid's
proof,
> > that
> > > no progression can effect the payback of game, enough times?

Is

> > your
> > > brain damaged? I based my sim on your explanation in this

forum.

> >
> > So why talk about 'special plays' if you both haven't read my
> > strategy,
>
> I already answer this above. How many baseball players would try
> keeping their eyes closed? It's obviously a losing

proposition ...

> just like your special plays. I don't need to waste time reading
your
> special play nonsense to know that it's nonsense. To make matters
> even worse for you, you 've mentioned a few of them here, proving
> beyond any doubt that they are indeed con-man nonsense.

I didn't even read that nonsense. as soon as I saw you desperately
reaching for straws again with 'baseball players' I knew it was a
feel-good rant.

Looks like the baseball analogy really hit home. It should. You
should realize there's a big difference between thinking outside the
box and thinking you can con everyone with obvious lies.

>
> > > > > > So now Bob's a liar too--only you're refraining from
> calling him that??
> > > > >
> > > > > I assume he either misread or misinterpreted or, another
very
> > > > likely situation, the writer was confused. We've certainly
seen
> > > that
> > > > in most of Rob's writings.
> > > >
> > > > Of course he was confused, little dicky.....of COURSE he

was!

> No
> > > one
> > > > could ever POSSIBLY have more insight and knowledge than

our

> own
> > > > little dicky.....
> > >
> > > Not in this area. They might have equivalent knowledge, but

not

> > more.
> >
> > Ah-ha HAHAHA!! Help me someone--I'm ready to pass out friom
> > LAUGHTER!!!!!
>
> RIV. Rob's been caught trying to sound important as another
> embarrassing moment approaches.

A geek who thinks no one knows more than him....in a world full of
geeks!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!!

Don't believe me? Find one.

>
> >
> > > Computers are really simple tools.
> >
> > So THAT's why you chose that field.....
>
> Simple, powerful and requiring significant creativeness to get

the

> most out them.

A complete turnaround in the claim once the master inputs! Truly, a
hypocritical bozo at work.

Just the facts, as usual. Now, don't you think a simple tool can be
powerful? Don't you think simple tools can be used in creative ways?
You really should think before you post next time.

>
> >
> > >They do what they are programmed
> > > to do. To make a statement like Bob did is nonsense to even a
> > novice programmer. And, I already explained exactly how mirror
> > results could occur. You're being foolish again, little man.
> >
> > This is so funny. You're being humiliated in your own field,

and

> the
> > best part is, you're BURYING YOURSELF with every word you write!
>
> Of course I am ... as Robbie's embarrassment builds.

This is almost too funny! He's being made a fool of by anyone and
everyone IN HIS OWN FIELD that he claims he's the expert's expert
at....and he still plays the boy on the whipping post!!!

Nice try, but your babbling only means you WERE embarrassed.

HAHAHAHAHA!!! somebody PLEASE help me before my gut

SPLITS!!!!!!!!!!!

RIV.

> > > > > > Is everyone supposed to be stupid and ignorant without
> > > > > > knowledge of anything pertinent except you?
> > > >
> > > > > In this case, it appears so. I know what I'm talking

about

> and
> > > > could write a coin-flip simulator in less that a day

myself.

> All
> > it
> > > > would take is deleting a lot of code from my VP simulator.
> > > >
> > > > You apparently don't know as much as you think you do. Bob
> > wouldn't lie about that because he has no reason to.
> >
> > > Like I said, there are several possible reasons for his
> confusion,
> > > lying is your game.
> >
> > So now he's not lying. Which is it?
>
> I see, you want to get a jump on your embarrassment. OK, if you

go

> back and look at my response, I said "lying is your game". LMAO.
> Don't you understand that "your" refers to you, moron. Your poor
> reading skills have done you in once again.

Your usual and perpetually baseless "go back and look" nonsense.

It's right above for everyone to read.

Those of us who have reading comprehension have zero need to 'go
back' like an unsure geek would do. Oh my God, are you for real???

Your hollow words betray your embarrassment.

>
> > All we see here is your covering
> > your butt by saying "no one can do it better'. Well, genius,
looks
> > like you've been trumped. Here's some words I'm sure you've

heard

> > many-a time "YOU'RE FIRED!"
>
> Still LMAO. You make an idiotic blunder and then RIV makes you

look

> even more foolish. I love it. I wonder what Donald would say to

you

> now?

YOU'RE FIRED!!!

That he would.

I wouldn't even pay you for time worked because you
faked it.

RIV.

>
> > >
> > > > I make you look small
> > > > enough by firing a truth barrage at you every day. Accept

the

> > fact that you were one-upped this time,
> > >
> > > OK, tell you what. I'll bet you $10,000 that I can produce a
> > program
> > > that correctly simulates a coin toss using a standard PRNG

and

> > > produces results favoring either heads and tails. You can

have

> > > anybody you want check the code and I will change it if they
find
> a
> > > problem. How about it? ... Now, you know how it really feels

to

> > > be "one-upped".
> >
> > Hmmmm....I did a little research on this while you were
scrambling
> > around trying to figure out how to respond to all the logic
you're
> > made to take in. I found out that the 'head' side had slighty
> higher
> > weight in every coin except 50c. Are you capable of programming
> that
> > in?
>
> ROTFLMAO. Sorry, while I take a break and catch my breath. This

is

> where Rob faces TOTAL humiliation. If the head has a "slighty
higher
> weight" then we all know it will come up more. The larger the
weight
> the more it will come up. We also know that is NOT what Bob

stated.

> He just said a "coin toss". Everyone reading his post understood
that
> he meant a FAIR coin toss, otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned

the

> small .002% variation. You've really stuck your nose in it now.

How

> does it smell?

HELLO McFLY??!! Ther is a SLIGHTLY HIGHER WEIGHT on the head side
whether you like it or not!

Of what, your beer? We're talking SIMULATED coin tosses, moron, you
know, there aren't really any coins involved. Do I have to spell it
out of you again?

Is that why you're in such a defensive
posture--you have to actually input the CORRECT parameters and you
don't want to??? What a fake!

LMAO. First you state I'm not able to understand a simulated coin
toss program and then switch it to a real coin toss. You really need
to cut back on those drinks. Here's what Bob said.

"... that in a million flips of a coin on computer simulation, that
heads would come up more often by a very very small percentage of
something like .002%" ... Do you see anything about a weighted coin-
toss? Anyone else? Nope, not there. Your scrambling must be terribly
embarrassing, you better just delete this thread too.

>
> >
> > > > go in the corner and give it a
> > > > good cry, call your mommy and maybe she'll listen to you,
then
> > come back and face the world like a man.
> > >
> > > RIV.
> >
> > Waaa....waaa..cry me a river!
>
> I think you can handle that. How does it feel to be so outclassed?

You just proved to all how you operate. With a simple program on a
coin flip you can't do it properly. Oh Jehovah, help this poor

man....

Now it's back to a program again. You are drunk aren't you?

>
> > > > > > He just told you....AGAIN. He 'discerns' short-term
> patterns.
> > > > Some people just may have that ability--even if you don't.
> > > > >
> > > > > If "some people" have this ability then why can't they
> explain
> > it?
> > > >
> > > > I explained mine and he explained his.
> > >
> > > No, you have provided no repeatable process. You only claim

it

> like
> > a typical con man. Put up or shut up.
> >
> > It's all been explained and said, little dicky. You can't

accept

> it,
> > then like I said, cry me a river.....
>
> Still waiting for that process. How sweet it is ...

Cry cry cry....like a little lost boy. It'll do you good.

Still waiting ...

>
> > >
> > > > What more do you want--us to
> > > > act like geeks at the machines and record evey hand and

card

> > > > occurrence?
> > >
> > > It has nothing to do with recording results. Your brain is
> damaged,
> > > isn't it? ... All you have to write down the steps that you
> follow
> > in recognizing the "pattern" and then define how that effects
your
> > > future plays.
> >
> > HELLO Einstein & McFLY!! The 'pattern' only shows up at the
> machines
> > and there are no 'steps' to it unless and until the machine
> performs.
>
> Give me a second, but I just can't stop laughing. How many times
have
> you used this con man BS? "I can't explain it to you, but TRUST
me".
> Rob, you are hilarious and I'm sure that RIV is celebrating.

You'll need more than a second to read it right. By now,
any 'programmer' who had any idea would know pattern recognition.

Robbie doesn't even understand what "know pattern recognition" means,
do you little man? If you did you would have explained the process
long ago. You see, pattern recognition can be explained using simple
words like "If you see a card in 6 out of 7 hands ..", etc. There's
no magic. They don't call it a "pattern" for nothing. LMAO.

and
you complain that I continue to say "You're FIRED"? Just be happy

you

never had to face me in your working days. What a fake!!

Rob's bluff has been called. He laid down his cards and they were
losers.

>
> > All the intelligent gambler need do is follow the card
> sequences/hand
> > occurrences and the answer is right there. You can't do it?

Then

> cry
> > me another river.
>
> Just follow the UNDEFINED "card sequences/hand occurrences".

Isn't

> this exactly like my student/Robbie example I gave last time?

This

is so funny, I am totally amazed a grown man could be this stupid.

As Bob said, geeks would never want to understand the process so
they'll reject any and all efforts to do it.

Nope, provide a process and I'll try it. Still waiting.

You're your own worst
enemy, little dicky. you're fighting yourself over this and you

don't

ever want to come to a conclusion. It'll just hurt too much for the
pain-hating geek to handle.

RIV.

>
> > >
> > > > > > And just how
> > > > > > does one go about 'testing and verifying' what he says

he

> > does anyway?
> > > > >
> > > > > Simple. Get a group of people to try it and report their
> > results. I'm willing to try it at low denoms. All I need is the
> > process.
> > > >
> > > > HAHAHAHAHA!! You mean like in a gang-bang video poker
marathon?
> > > > Here's your process: put the money in, play the hands, and

if

> you
> > > > have the talent to detect patterns then you will. Very

simple.

> > >
> > > This is all I wanted you to admit. You have no process. You
can't
> > > explain it to anyone. Typical con man BS. We've seen it all
> before.
> >
> > It's all right there, little dicky. Accept it or cry me a
river.....
>
> We all know who's crying right now. And, also, that you will

never

> admit it.

Cry that river and be done. I promise to stop stomping all over you
if you do!

RIV.

>
> > >
> > > Robbie: Go ahead and detect the patterns.
> > > Student: How do I do that?
> > > Robbie: Uh, just do it like I said.
> > > Student: You didn't say anything.
> > > Robbie: Boy are you stupid. I guess some students can't be
taught.
> >
> > Student: You're right Robbie. Now where do you want me to cry
you a river?
> >
> > > > Too bad little dicky. Whenever you go into that tirade all
> you're doing is slapping the "I am a sap" sticker on your

forehead

for all the world to see.
> > >
> > > I see, now your speaking for both Bob and CF. I wonder how

they

> > like that? Hey guys, don't bother posting any more. Rob has

read

> your
> > > minds and will take over from here.
> >
> > You're right. They'll say the same as me.
>
> Is that right? Bob and CF, would you say the same things Rob has
said
> in this post? Bob, did you really mean "weighted coin toss" but
> forgot to mention it?
>
> > You have this weak tirade
> > going on and all you can do is rant and then cry. Never any
facts. All accusations simply because you feel inferior and you

like

> crying in the rain.You have yet to find a way to protect you from
the undeniable truth. I wish I could say I feel your pain....but
> you so deservedly get the whole enchilada every time you ask for

it.

> If I lost all the time as you claim, then my bank account should

be

> dwindling. Instead it keeps going up. So, do you want to see my
bank account or would you rather keep making foolish claims? We all
know the answer to this one.

Sounds like a trick the Queen uses. Keep 'borrowing' from her and

the

boy friend's 401k, stuff the bank account so there's always plenty

of

gambling money around, then piss it away on the machines.

No problem, you can see the 401Ks as well. Both bank accounts, mutual
funds, the works. Yup, all there for you to see and all it takes is
$10K.

Yup, you've
got something to be proud of there allright! All you addicts are

the

same. You lose all year, then claim 'you've won because you had the
advantage' every time you played! When you lose you never lose, and
when you win you lose it all back anyway because you have that A-D-

V-

A-N-T-A-G-E. Clown video poker at its best!!

The babblemaster returns. So, are you going to just keep babbling or
do you want to see the truth?

[rgmustain]

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

> Rob, just admitted that he lost another one. This must be his new
> approach to looking foolish. By the way, Rob, let me explain what

you

> gained by deleting my response that PROVED you are a worthless
LIAR …http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/4108…
Nothing. Here it is again for everyone to read.

I know I know, you depend on these long, messy threads to try and
confuse anyone who reads them.

RIV.

And when you're wordy--

Really RIV. I think eveyone can see who writes the most words.

which is not the
norm for a geek--we all see how nervous you are in your quest to

make

yourself feel at least half-confident after you've been flogged in
public yet again. I suggest for that good feeling of being

superior, bo

on back in and boss your wife around again. That'll get your
confidence back up there, for sure! Make believe she's me and it'll
climb that much faster. Go ahead---give it your best shot like you

do

all the time! Never mind you've never had the upper hand with me.
Just "make believe" (now that's not hard for a pathological addict

to

do, is it???) you're pushing a REAL MAN around and you'll be set

free!!

Now, who is the wordy one? It looks like I hit a nerve again. Rob
obviously thought that posting a response, with the proof of his lies
deleted, that he could make it go away. LMAO.

[Rob_Singer1]

> I don't know whether to
> laugh or call up Salem and get the local witch to explain pot-

kettle-black to me! Oh, and I believe you know why I reply to as many
posts as possible here: To get your goat! And guess what--You comply
EVERY TIME! HAHAHAHA!! The puppetmaster at his best!

Seems strange that you would claim credit for having me expose your
lies and con. So be it.

As you back into your corner once again....The puppetmaster at work
once again and shining brightly!

> > > Positive? You got the money I got the name!
> >
> > I got lots of money, you got con. Me too smart to fall for it.
>
> Just how is paying for a name a 'con'?

Because it's of NO value. That's why it's called a con.

But it's YOU who are dying to get the name, little dicky. Are you
saying you have no value in front of everyone now??

> You get the name, talk to him,
> then pay. Or are you saying you're afraid of that reality stick
> hitting you once again.....

You're the one claiming all this BS. If you can't back it up then

YOU are the one that's afraid. PS. If you had a name you would post
it.

For $10,000--and I KNOW your in dire need of it! that's what i like
about you. You long for something I have, I make you pay if you
really want it, then I get to enjoy watching you squirm and writhe in
agony after you can't come up with the payment and continue
sufferring! God, can it EVER get any better than this???

> > > If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done it by
> now.
> >
> > What more proof do you need? My bank account is an open book.
>
> ??? That's proof of what??? C'mon. Prove it by documenting every
> session, bank withdrawal, deposit, tax return, and casino/IRS
record that you keep. Not too hard to do, is it?

Nope. I have them all. I'll let you see them ALL for $10,000 and an
admission that I have won exactly as I've claimed.

We've gone thru this before, and you've backed out more times than
Cogngo makes believe he wins. I pay for your proof, you pay $640k for
mine. Mine's worth a lot more because I'm somebody and you're not.

> C'mon little dicky--here's
> your chance to wipe all that egg off your face. Show the proof

you

> claim no one else ever does.

No problem. Get the cash together

Where shall we meet--and bring cash only.

> > > Instead, you choose to suffer through what to a geek must be
> > > unbearable embarrassment.
> >
> > RIV. And clearly indicative of Rob's position at this time.

He's

> been
> > caught in so many lies that I've lost track. He quits

responding

to
> > those thread while jumping in and mentioning my name every time
he
> > posts. I wonder if he realizes this justs adds to his
embarrassment?
>
> The more you bring it up the more you show how much you enjoy the
> ridiculing you get! And I'm just the guy for the job!!

Doesn't appear that way. You've been running away from my proof of
your lies for the last week.

I just love how he operates under the title of being his own worst
enemy....

> > > > > You can even throw a few thousand
> > > > > in there because you played 'tournaments'...and lost them
> too. It's like a bunch of clowns being ripped a new one by me

week

> after week after week.
> > > >
> > > > Yup. I can hear the moans ... wait, I didn't hear any.

Could

> > this
> > > be another lie? Well, of course it is. Rob couldn't go down
> without
> > > > throwing in a few idiotic assertions.
> > >
> > > Exactly what I mean when you are getting ripped a new one.
Kinda
> > > makes you hold your breath, doesn't it!
> >
> > It makes you look impotent and stupid. Works for me.
>
> Did that come directly out of where I ripped you a new one?

No, it came from the big hole I ripped in your con. The big
difference is ... my statement is true.

Little dicky, let me explain something to you. I've ripped you so
many new ones here that you ain't got much left to rip away at! But
what the hey....you're close to death anyway, and you're trying to
get there sooner every time you step into one of your casinos. Our
Father, Who Art In Heaven.........
  

> > > He left you with some common sense and some reality. Truly,
> foreign entities to a theorist wearing blinders.
> >
> > Once more Rob avoids providing any reasonable process; asserts
some
> > nonsense; and runs away and hides. Wait, I think I just

detected

> > another pattern, tell me Robbie, what should I hold?
>
> You're Robbie isn't hiding, to your discomfort little dickey....
He's
> right here, constantly belittling you and commanding you do do my
> every beck & call.....

But, Rob, I saw a pattern and you didn't tell me what to hold. Gee,
what a disappointment.

I've got the feeling you live a LIFETIME of disappointments---ask the
missus.

>
> > > > > To say he wins because of some
> > > > > > nebulous claim of detecting patterns is about the same

as

> > > > claiming hitting the hold button a few times increases

wins.

> > > Actually, the latter is a definable and testable process.

It's

> > worth
> > > more.
> > > > >
> > > > > Um....not a good effort there, little dicky. You don't
> > understand it and obviously don't have his talent. Save your
> dignity and just admit it.
> > > >
> > > > Robbie can't refute my logic once again. RIV steps in and
tells
> > us why.
>
> And here it is again! You just can't handle it when told of

another

> human being living that has more intelligence than you and it's
> PROVEN!

Is this the same intelligence that came up with "golf balls" or
the "coin flip" BS? Need I say more.

> And there I am....watching you hurt and enjoying the agony!

> > > When all you can come up with is 'hit the hold button' the

flow

> of illogic begins to overpower. Save your dignity....heed those
words.
> >
> > No, what I came up with is a process that is one-step better

than

a
> > mythical pattern detection one. It has a process (however
> > worthless) , you have none.
>
> "The process of 'hit the hold button'. MY, what GENIUS!

And that puts you where .... One step below.

Below what--a theory that you live?? No thanks--I'll take my superior
position to you that I've always enjoyed.

> I'm sensing
> more and more envy with every foot you stick in your mouth. And
> you're reaching for them now!

You're scrambling on every post. You duck every factual statement

and

assert more BS. It's good to see you behave this way. It's most
likely a preamble to your next exit.

And it looks like you just found another foot to pile into the mouth.
Every dumb statement you make = another foot.

> >
> > >
> > > > > > The only thing I've seen so far is an unverifiable

claim.

> > Even
> > > > > Bob isn't sure he hasn't simply been lucky.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then it all went right thru that big ol' hole in your

head

> > again.
> > > > He
> > > > > says he's been lucky, and even luckier when he applies

his

> > > pattern-detection skills. but that hurts you, doesn't it.
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't have any effect on me.
> > >
> > > Of course not, and he predicted it wouldn't because of your
bias
> > and geek-logic long ago.
> >
> > Sorry, little man, I've already said I believe Bob has won.
>
> Um, if you have to change the subject to feel better after being
> slapped down and kicked, better keep doing it with your wife.

What's the matter--cat got your tongue on that one?? You personify
the typical hide-and-go-geek. You're a BIG MAN yelling at your wife
in the kitchen, but here when you get whipped around, you can't hold
back the crybaby stuff.

> What is
> > unverifiable is whether his undefinable special plays had any
part
> in
> > it. You'd think that someone who claims no one will listen to

him

> > would jump at the chance to discuss them. Instead he runs away
and
> > refuses to discuss them. The only logical conclusion anyone can
get
> > out of this is he has no idea whether these "unorthodox" plays
have
> > had any impact on his results.
>
> Here's a news flash specifically for little dicky: HE CAME ON,
> EXPLAINED IT ALL,

Still waiting for you to write it down. If he "EXPLAINED IT ALL",
this should be a trivial task.

Just do your geeky thing and search. What? You don't have anything
better to do and you know it. You and the wife lost feelings for each
othere--save for the GAMBLING DAY JITTERS--long, long ago.

> IT MADE PERFECT SENSE TO THOSE WHO WANTED TO
> UNDERSTAND IT,

And you still can't write it down.

> THEN HE LEFT SAYING GEEKS LIKE YOU WOULD NEVER GET IT
> ANYWAY.

Lie, he never said that.

When you do your search you'll see it....as much as it must hurt
inside.

> Seems like he took your self-labeled 'genius' label away from
> you in plain sight!

He comes in and claims a pattern detection theory. Never says how

he

does it and exits quickly ducking every question regarding his
approach ... You are looking more foolish by the moment.

And just why would he waste MORE time explaining it AGAIN to you when
you don't want it to be true, you could never handle the truth, and
iit would probably drive you so nuts you'd kill the dog!

> > > > > That's funny.....I've already read what he wrote and I
> > understand it. Now where'd you say you went to school?
> > > >
> > > > OK, you write down the process.
> > >
> > > How about "OK, YOU go back and READ the process"!
> >
> > Can't do it, can you? I rest my case.
>
> I don't want to do your work. You have the problem, fix it.

I have no problem. You've claimed he has a process. You've claimed
you understand this process. You can't write it down. Even a cave

man could see the the contradiction in your story.

Do your search and stop whining. Not our problem you haven't the
reading comprehension of the rest of us.

You've seen all the clear explanations, and the geek
in
> you rejects them. We're right/you're wrong. simple as that. Since
it
> bothers you so, go take it out on your wife like you probably do
all
> the time. It's almost impossible to visualize the sufferring she
must
> go thru with you. You're soooo neurotic, in need of documentation
on
> every issue that fits YOUR agenda, and when you & she argue, you
> remain in a state of denial that she's right. Man, you must have
her
> trapped in some kind of bizzare relationship!

LMAO. Intense babbling always means RIV is getting his way.

A direct hit again. It's a bit sad and almost unbelievable, but you
confirm my 'assertions' every time you do your dance.

> > You've been reading it for a couple of days now. Write down the
> > process and we'll get a group together to use it and track the
> > results. It so simple a cave man could figure it out (sorry
geico).
>
> "sorry GEICO??" Huh? How corny can you be??? So drop the stall

and

> let's see it.

I just did, moron. Go back to the 4th grade ... and this time pay
attention.

Now drop the drawers so we can all see where your brains are located
in plain view!

> > > > > And while you're at it, prove to
> > > > > us that you 'win' with your nerd method by providing
> verifiable
> > > > > substantiation > > > > So when challenged to provide

exactly what you challenge

another
> to
> > > supply, you deek out thru one of your famous escape routes.
> You'll
> > > all class, little dicky.
> >
> > Whatsa matta, chicken man, the truth hurts? Let's see YOUR
results.
> > YOU brought it up. PROVE that you have won.
>
> Now you're asking for MY results again? Why, you want to be
> embarrassed again?? Just prove you win and I'll save you the

anger

of
> seeing REAL results.

Backing down? In front of everyone? This is not like you Robbie.
Could it be your publisher TOLD you to stop the betting or hit the
road? Now, you have nothing to fall back on. Come on, chicken-man,
you started this, show us your results. I've already offered up

mine to you.

Oh, you want my results--go to my site and weep. If you have any
weeping left in you after the beating you keep absorbing here!

> > > > > What you do know is that I'M psychic. I can see right
through
> > you
> > > > > all the time.
> > > >
> > > > Is that why you make yourself look foolish so often? It

must

be
> > > > that "gofer goof ball" in you that does it.
> > >
> > > Right thru you, little dicky....right thru you.
> >
> > LMAO. Is that why you quit responding to the threads where I
> > demonstrate that you have lied? You better get those eyes

checked

> > out.

Sorry, I didn't write that. Your damaged brain must be short
circuiting as well.

Denial. What a surprise.

> You're so confused right
> now

I think it's pretty clear who's confused.

Pee Wee Herman. You always say what I say every time you want to quit
the thread. Ever notice that?

> you don't know whether you're coming or going! Kinda just a tad
> bit different than that MANLY control you exert over your poor
addict
> wife, huh???

> > > > If you think being lucky constitutes intelligence, then you
are
> > far more stupid than I can put into words.
>
> Being smart constitutes intelligence....as in taking the win home
and
> not worrying about your phantom bucks. Being a pessimist is just
> another trait of a pathological losing gambler. You're an open,
silly
> but sad book.

You already responded to this statement before. Are you drinking

this

early in the day again?

It's twice the fun burying you a second time!

> > >
> > > Being lucky thru the use of intelligent special plays. Sorry,
but
> > you can cry all you want.
> >
> > Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.
>
> Not surprising. It goes right thru that geek armor and to the

heart

> of the matter.

RIV. Making idiotic plays is at the very heart of your con, that

much

is true.

Yup, it's idiotic winning, what was it....$100,000??! Out of your
league we know. But it's an irritant nonetheless.

> >
> > > > We're talking about special plays and I wouldn't waste my
time
> > > > reading yours. Is that 4th grade reading comprehension

you're

> > > > displaying?
> > >
> > > Oh that's right. You've already admitted not really knowing
what
> > they
> > > entail. Oh dear.
> >
> > I know all I need to know.
>
> The typical reply from the person who is desperately trying to

end the discussion before he looks too stupid.

RIV.

See.

> You advocate making a negative play. What
> > more is there? It's equivalent to telling a baseball player to
> swing
> > at a few pitches with his eyes closed because he might get

lucky.

> > Sure, it could happen, but over time it's a losing plan.
>
> A "negitive play" according to little dicky: Dealt QQQAK with 2-

to-

> the-royal. Hold AKQ, win $100,000. THAT'S QUITE THE NEGATIVE

PLAY,

> HEY GOOFBALL!!!!!!!!!!!! You're really a vp clown, right?

Anyone can make up a story like that.

Oh, so now, in your need to make it all 'go away' because it gives
you heartburn to know I win so much, you say it didn't happen. If
that's what makes you feel better, then you have to do it. but I KNOW
you lie awake at night thinking, worrying, and agonizing about it
night after night after night. And I like it!

The number of times you've been

caught in lies this week alone makes it very obvious this NEVER
happened. Not to mention that you would hit this 1 out of 1081

tries

on average. In that time, playing $25 9-6 DDB (or equivalent) you
would end up losing over $540000 by making this play. I think you
should try another lie. So, back to the baseball analogy. Let's

hear you scramble some more.

Sorry to burst your geek-bubble, but two gurus friends of your
already had the same hair on your butt over this as you do, and the
W2G went to my publisher's office and they saw it. And it wasn't DDB.
It was on BP. The special play on DDB to hold the Q's doesn't come
into effect until you're playing your 155th credit with no cash outs,
and it never comes into play on SDBP.

> > > > > then read Bob's post one more time. Then you have
permission to take a cold shower.
> > > >
> > > > Why? It still provides no information. Do you
> think "unorthodox" conveys any usable information? Is your brain
> permanently damaged?
>
> ANY information would seem to be useful whether you understand it
or not.

Then provide some.

> You clearly have trouble opening up and taking in any info
> transfer unless it's an exact fit for your thin pipeline.

It can't fit in any pipeline until you provide it.

> And this is
> exactly why you should be in the cold shower right
> about now! All the info's there. all you need do is read, little

dicky....read.

> > > So why talk about 'special plays' if you both haven't read my
> > > strategy,
> >

your special play nonsense to know that it's nonsense. To make
matters even worse for you, you 've mentioned a few of them here,
proving beyond any doubt that they are indeed con-man nonsense.

>
> I didn't even read that nonsense. as soon as I saw you

desperately reaching for straws again with 'baseball players' I knew
it was a feel-good rant.

Looks like the baseball analogy really hit home. It should. You
should realize there's a big difference between thinking outside

the box and thinking you can con everyone with obvious lies.

Well, i haven't yet read your stupid straw baseball story and why
bother. You're full of corn when it comes to analogies and who can
read your weird mind anyway. What you need to do is concentrate on
agonizing over the special plays you cry about. THAT's what makes me
happy!

> >
> > > > > > > So now Bob's a liar too--only you're refraining from
> > calling him that??
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I assume he either misread or misinterpreted or,

another

> very
> > > > > likely situation, the writer was confused. We've

certainly

> seen
> > > > that
> > > > > in most of Rob's writings.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course he was confused, little dicky.....of COURSE he
was!
> > No
> > > > one
> > > > > could ever POSSIBLY have more insight and knowledge than
our
> > own
> > > > > little dicky.....
> > > >
> > > > Not in this area. They might have equivalent knowledge, but
not
> > > more.
> > >
> > > Ah-ha HAHAHA!! Help me someone--I'm ready to pass out friom
> > > LAUGHTER!!!!!
> >
> > RIV. Rob's been caught trying to sound important as another
> > embarrassing moment approaches.
>
> A geek who thinks no one knows more than him....in a world full

of

> geeks!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!!

Don't believe me? Find one.

Obviously, I know much more than you and have far more life
experience than you can even dream of if your nights weren't so full
of nightmares from being made the fool here. But I'm not the geek
you're looking for. Just about anyone will do, seeing that you've
also proven how incompetent your so-called 'programmer skills' are.
Once you shed the light on that subject, you put capital letters in
the word FOOL.
  

> > > > Computers are really simple tools.
> > >
> > > So THAT's why you chose that field.....
> >
> > Simple, powerful and requiring significant creativeness to get
the
> > most out them.
>
> A complete turnaround in the claim once the master inputs! Truly,

a hypocritical bozo at work.

Just the facts, as usual.

Normal response when rattled.

Now, don't you think a simple tool can be powerful? Don't you think

simple tools can be used in creative ways? You really should think
before you post next time.

But you're simple, and you're not powerful! Next!

> > > >They do what they are programmed
> > > > to do. To make a statement like Bob did is nonsense to even

a

> > > novice programmer. And, I already explained exactly how

mirror

> > > results could occur. You're being foolish again, little man.
> > >
> > > This is so funny. You're being humiliated in your own field,
and
> > the
> > > best part is, you're BURYING YOURSELF with every word you

write!

> >
> > Of course I am ... as Robbie's embarrassment builds.

As we watch you continue to bury yourself deeper and deeper.....

>
> This is almost too funny! He's being made a fool of by anyone and
> everyone IN HIS OWN FIELD that he claims he's the expert's expert
> at....and he still plays the boy on the whipping post!!!

Nice try, but your babbling only means you WERE embarrassed.

Get it? IN YOUR OWN FIELD!! You're such a failure and you don't even
know it! HAHAHAHAHA!!! somebody PLEASE help me before my gut

SPLITS!!!!!!!!!!!
  
> > > > > > > Is everyone supposed to be stupid and ignorant

without

> > > > > > > knowledge of anything pertinent except you?
> > > > >
> > > > > > In this case, it appears so. I know what I'm talking
about
> > and
> > > > > could write a coin-flip simulator in less that a day
myself.
> > All
> > > it
> > > > > would take is deleting a lot of code from my VP simulator.
> > > > >
> > > > > You apparently don't know as much as you think you do.

Bob

> > > wouldn't lie about that because he has no reason to.
> > >
> > > > Like I said, there are several possible reasons for his
> > confusion,
> > > > lying is your game.
> > >
> > > So now he's not lying. Which is it?
> >
> > I see, you want to get a jump on your embarrassment. OK, if you
go
> > back and look at my response, I said "lying is your game".

LMAO.

> > Don't you understand that "your" refers to you, moron. Your

poor

> > reading skills have done you in once again.
>
> Your usual and perpetually baseless "go back and look" nonsense.

It's right above for everyone to read.

> Those of us who have reading comprehension have zero need to 'go
> back' like an unsure geek would do. Oh my God, are you for

real???

Your hollow words betray your embarrassment.

Are you for real?

> > > All we see here is your covering
> > > your butt by saying "no one can do it better'. Well, genius,
> looks
> > > like you've been trumped. Here's some words I'm sure you've
heard
> > > many-a time "YOU'RE FIRED!"
> >
> > Still LMAO. You make an idiotic blunder and then RIV makes you
look
> > even more foolish. I love it. I wonder what Donald would say to
you
> > now?
>
> YOU'RE FIRED!!!

That he would.

> I wouldn't even pay you for time worked because you
> faked it.

> > > > > I make you look small
> > > > > enough by firing a truth barrage at you every day. Accept
the
> > > fact that you were one-upped this time,
> > > >
> > > > OK, tell you what. I'll bet you $10,000 that I can produce

a

> > > program
> > > > that correctly simulates a coin toss using a standard PRNG
and
> > > > produces results favoring either heads and tails. You can
have
> > > > anybody you want check the code and I will change it if

they

> find
> > a
> > > > problem. How about it? ... Now, you know how it really

feels

to
> > > > be "one-upped".
> > >
> > > Hmmmm....I did a little research on this while you were
> scrambling
> > > around trying to figure out how to respond to all the logic
> you're
> > > made to take in. I found out that the 'head' side had slighty
> > higher
> > > weight in every coin except 50c. Are you capable of

programming

> > that
> > > in?
> >
> > ROTFLMAO. Sorry, while I take a break and catch my breath. This
is
> > where Rob faces TOTAL humiliation. If the head has a "slighty
> higher
> > weight" then we all know it will come up more. The larger the
> weight
> > the more it will come up. We also know that is NOT what Bob
stated.
> > He just said a "coin toss". Everyone reading his post

understood

> that
> > he meant a FAIR coin toss, otherwise he wouldn't have mentioned
the
> > small .002% variation. You've really stuck your nose in it now.
How
> > does it smell?
>
> HELLO McFLY??!! Ther is a SLIGHTLY HIGHER WEIGHT on the head side
> whether you like it or not!

Of what, your beer? We're talking SIMULATED coin tosses, moron, you
know, there aren't really any coins involved. Do I have to spell it
out of you again?

Wishy-washing the words will not change the known fact about the head
side of a coin. Struggle with it as you will, you're geek-upbringing
causes your pain at these things and nothing else. Don't blame me for
your agony on this one!Is that why you're in such a defensive

> posture--you have to actually input the CORRECT parameters and

you don't want to??? What a fake!

LMAO. First you state I'm not able to understand a simulated coin
toss program and then switch it to a real coin toss. You really

need to cut back on those drinks. Here's what Bob said.

Oh boy!--I made him do it again! What a nerd!!

"... that in a million flips of a coin on computer simulation, that
heads would come up more often by a very very small percentage of
something like .002%" ... Do you see anything about a weighted coin-
toss?

Could it just possibly be that's because you didn't paste all of his
wording here?? Now could it??? Caught with your pants down around
your ankles again little dicky. Yuk! Please pull them back up!!

> You just proved to all how you operate. With a simple program on

a coin flip you can't do it properly. Oh Jehovah, help this poor

man....

Now it's back to a program again. You are drunk aren't you?

What's the matter, your geek-language getting to you a little....

> >
> > > > > > > He just told you....AGAIN. He 'discerns' short-term
> > patterns.
> > > > > Some people just may have that ability--even if you

don't.

> > > > > >
> > > > > > If "some people" have this ability then why can't they
> > explain
> > > it?
> > > > >
> > > > > I explained mine and he explained his.
> > > >
> > > > No, you have provided no repeatable process. You only claim
it
> > like
> > > a typical con man. Put up or shut up.
> > >
> > > It's all been explained and said, little dicky. You can't
accept
> > it,
> > > then like I said, cry me a river.....
> >
> > Still waiting for that process. How sweet it is ...
>
> Cry cry cry....like a little lost boy. It'll do you good.

Still waiting ...

And still crying. You and your 'processes'! HAHAHA! What a noodle-
brain!

All you have to write down the steps that you
> > follow
> > > in recognizing the "pattern" and then define how that effects
> your
> > > > future plays.
> > >
> > > HELLO Einstein & McFLY!! The 'pattern' only shows up at the
> > machines
> > > and there are no 'steps' to it unless and until the machine
> > performs.
> >
> > Give me a second, but I just can't stop laughing. How many

times

> have
> > you used this con man BS? "I can't explain it to you, but TRUST
> me".
> > Rob, you are hilarious and I'm sure that RIV is celebrating.
>
> You'll need more than a second to read it right. By now,
> any 'programmer' who had any idea would know pattern recognition.

Robbie doesn't even understand what "know pattern recognition"

means,

do you little man?

I see you're trying to save a little face here and just in case the
other engineers are reading, you now will try to win their confidence
by BS'ing and squirming. sorry, little dicky. You're just not that
smart, and I've proven it beyond your momma's grave.

If you did you would have explained the process

long ago. You see, pattern recognition can be explained using

simple

words like "If you see a card in 6 out of 7 hands ..", etc. There's
no magic. They don't call it a "pattern" for nothing. LMAO.

And you further your embarrassment. Incredible! I didn't know the
human soul could take that kind...and this kind...of punishment!
Doesn't work like that little dicky--accept that you just have no
idea and there are smarter people in this world and right here, than
you.

> and
> you complain that I continue to say "You're FIRED"? Just be happy
you
> never had to face me in your working days. What a fake!!

Rob's bluff has been called. He laid down his cards and they were
losers.

My only regret in life is that you never were good enough to get into
a company I worked for so I could fire you for being a fake, for your
incompetence, and for who knows what vides you had back them to go
along with your geekiness!

> >
> > > All the intelligent gambler need do is follow the card
> > sequences/hand
> > > occurrences and the answer is right there. You can't do it?
Then
> > cry
> > > me another river.
> >
> > Just follow the UNDEFINED "card sequences/hand occurrences".
Isn't
> > this exactly like my student/Robbie example I gave last time?
This
> is so funny, I am totally amazed a grown man could be this stupid.
>
> As Bob said, geeks would never want to understand the process so
> they'll reject any and all efforts to do it.

Nope, provide a process and I'll try it. Still waiting.

Exactly what he said. now you're denying that, so why would you do
anything but deny everything that didn't have your signature to it?
Not only are you incompetent in your own so-called 'field' you
probably have no friends because of your attitude. One thing's for
sure--you get a lot of laughs from every direction just by making
believe you're somebody when you're not.You're your own worst
enemy, little dicky. you're fighting yourself over this and you
don't ever want to come to a conclusion. It'll just hurt too much
for the pain-hating geek to handle.

> > > > > > Simple. Get a group of people to try it and report

their

> > > results. I'm willing to try it at low denoms. All I need is

the

> > > process.
> > > > >
> > > > > HAHAHAHAHA!! You mean like in a gang-bang video poker
> marathon?
> > > > > Here's your process: put the money in, play the hands,

and

if
> > you
> > > > > have the talent to detect patterns then you will. Very
simple.
> > > >
> > > > This is all I wanted you to admit. You have no process. You
> can't
> > > > explain it to anyone. Typical con man BS. We've seen it all
> > before.
> > >
> > > It's all right there, little dicky. Accept it or cry me a
> river.....
> >
> > We all know who's crying right now. And, also, that you will
never
> > admit it.
>
> Cry that river and be done. I promise to stop stomping all over

you

> if you do!

> > > > Robbie: Go ahead and detect the patterns.
> > > > Student: How do I do that?
> > > > Robbie: Uh, just do it like I said.
> > > > Student: You didn't say anything.
> > > > Robbie: Boy are you stupid. I guess some students can't be
> taught.
> > >
> > > Student: You're right Robbie. Now where do you want me to

cry

> you a river?
> > >
> > > > > Too bad little dicky. Whenever you go into that tirade

all

> > you're doing is slapping the "I am a sap" sticker on your
forehead
> for all the world to see.
> > > >
> > > > I see, now your speaking for both Bob and CF. I wonder how
they
> > > like that? Hey guys, don't bother posting any more. Rob has
read
> > your
> > > > minds and will take over from here.
> > >
> > > You're right. They'll say the same as me.
> >
> > Is that right? Bob and CF, would you say the same things Rob

has

> said
> > in this post? Bob, did you really mean "weighted coin toss" but
> > forgot to mention it?
> >
> > > You have this weak tirade
> > > going on and all you can do is rant and then cry. Never any
> facts. All accusations simply because you feel inferior and you
like
> > crying in the rain.You have yet to find a way to protect you

from

> the undeniable truth. I wish I could say I feel your pain....but
> > you so deservedly get the whole enchilada every time you ask

for

it.
>
> > If I lost all the time as you claim, then my bank account

should

be
> > dwindling. Instead it keeps going up. So, do you want to see my
> bank account or would you rather keep making foolish claims? We

all

> know the answer to this one.
>
> Sounds like a trick the Queen uses. Keep 'borrowing' from her and
the
> boy friend's 401k, stuff the bank account so there's always

plenty

of
> gambling money around, then piss it away on the machines.

No problem, you can see the 401Ks as well. Both bank accounts,

mutual funds, the works. Yup, all there for you to see and all it
takes is $10K.

Like you'd just whip them out! HA! You have a history of pathological
lying as well as welching on everything you say. Goes right along
with you posting on-word answers and deleting direct-hits that i nail
you with. Making believe none of it ever happened---just like how you
got tossed around in high schol. HAHA!!

> Yup, you've
> got something to be proud of there allright! All you addicts are
the
> same. You lose all year, then claim 'you've won because you had

the

> advantage' every time you played! When you lose you never lose,

and

> when you win you lose it all back anyway because you have that A-

D-

V-
> A-N-T-A-G-E. Clown video poker at its best!!

The babblemaster returns. So, are you going to just keep babbling

or do you want to see the truth?

the only truth that has ever shown up here is two-fold: First, in
everything I write; Second, when you admitted your wife was the same
type addict you were. A sour life you are cursed with...and the
missus is cursed with you.

···

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

[Rob_Singer1]

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > Rob, just admitted that he lost another one. This must be his

new

> > approach to looking foolish. By the way, Rob, let me explain

what

you
> > gained by deleting my response that PROVED you are a worthless
> LIAR …http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/4108…
> Nothing. Here it is again for everyone to read.
>
> I know I know, you depend on these long, messy threads to try and
> confuse anyone who reads them.

RIV.

> And when you're wordy--

Really RIV. I think eveyone can see who writes the most words.

> which is not the
> norm for a geek--we all see how nervous you are in your quest to
make
> yourself feel at least half-confident after you've been flogged

in

> public yet again. I suggest for that good feeling of being
superior, bo
> on back in and boss your wife around again. That'll get your
> confidence back up there, for sure! Make believe she's me and

it'll

> climb that much faster. Go ahead---give it your best shot like

you

do
> all the time! Never mind you've never had the upper hand with me.
> Just "make believe" (now that's not hard for a pathological

addict

to
> do, is it???) you're pushing a REAL MAN around and you'll be set
free!!

Now, who is the wordy one? It looks like I hit a nerve again. Rob
obviously thought that posting a response, with the proof of his

lies deleted, that he could make it go away. LMAO.

That hurt, didn't it! Good. that's the sign of a direct hit. Whenever
you try to weasel out of a topic you simply post RIV and hope it all
goes away. But uh-oh.....I'm baaaack! You'll have to suffer thru all
your nightmares about me because I deliver the truth about your
phoniness, and you support it with your stupidity.

···

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

[rgmustain]

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

> > > Rob, just admitted that he lost another one. This must be his
new
> > > approach to looking foolish. By the way, Rob, let me explain
what
> you
> > > gained by deleting my response that PROVED you are a

worthless

> >

LIAR …http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/4108…

> > Nothing. Here it is again for everyone to read.
> >
> > I know I know, you depend on these long, messy threads to try

and

> > confuse anyone who reads them.
>
> RIV.
>
> > And when you're wordy--
>
> Really RIV. I think eveyone can see who writes the most words.
>
> > which is not the
> > norm for a geek--we all see how nervous you are in your quest

to

> make
> > yourself feel at least half-confident after you've been flogged
in
> > public yet again. I suggest for that good feeling of being
> superior, bo
> > on back in and boss your wife around again. That'll get your
> > confidence back up there, for sure! Make believe she's me and
it'll
> > climb that much faster. Go ahead---give it your best shot like
you
> do
> > all the time! Never mind you've never had the upper hand with

me.

> > Just "make believe" (now that's not hard for a pathological
addict
> to
> > do, is it???) you're pushing a REAL MAN around and you'll be

set

> free!!
>
> Now, who is the wordy one? It looks like I hit a nerve again. Rob
> obviously thought that posting a response, with the proof of his
lies deleted, that he could make it go away. LMAO.

That hurt, didn't it!

No, not in the least. I got a good laugh at all of your babbling.

Good. that's the sign of a direct hit. Whenever
you try to weasel out of a topic you simply post RIV and hope it

all

goes away.

Sorry, you're the only one who deletes the body of threads. Did you
think the archives would vanish as well. Are you a complete moron?

But uh-oh.....I'm baaaack! You'll have to suffer thru all
your nightmares about me because I deliver the truth about your
phoniness, and you support it with your stupidity.

No, everyone skims over your babbling so easily. All those words just
go down the tube without having there intended effect. On the other
hand, the real truth, supplied by me, is what everyone sees. It's no
wonder your so jealous.

[Rob_Singer1]

> > > I know I know, you depend on these long, messy threads to try
and confuse anyone who reads them.

which is not the norm for a geek--we all see how nervous you are in

your quest to make yourself feel at least half-confident after you've
been flogged in public yet again. I suggest for that good feeling of
being superior, bo on back in and boss your wife around again.
That'll get your confidence back up there, for sure! Make believe
she's me and it'll climb that much faster. Go ahead---give it your
best shot like you do all the time! Never mind you've never had the
upper hand with me. Just "make believe" (now that's not hard for a
pathological addict todo, is it???) you're pushing a REAL MAN around
and you'll be set free!!

> >
> > Now, who is the wordy one? It looks like I hit a nerve again.

Rob obviously thought that posting a response, with the proof of his

> lies deleted, that he could make it go away. LMAO.
>
> That hurt, didn't it!

No, not in the least. I got a good laugh at all of your babbling.

That REALLY hurt, didn't it! It's OK, little dicky. I understand your
pain here, seeing that you realize other people can see how you boss
the wife around and all. You can use my nanky. And good. that's the
sign of a direct hit. Whenever you try to weasel out of a topic you
simply post RIV and hope it all just goes away.

Sorry, you're the only one who deletes the body of threads. Did you
think the archives would vanish as well. Are you a complete moron?

And now comes the denial brought on by struggling to feel confident
that you make any sense. Keep it up--nothing but enjoyment on this
end! But uh-oh.....I'm baaaack! You'll have to suffer thru all
your nightmares about me because I deliver the truth about your
phoniness, and you support it with your stupidity.

No, everyone skims over your babbling so easily. All those words

just go down the tube without having there intended effect.

Here's a flash, little dicky....they're all for only YOU!! I already
see your pain here and you never were any good at hiding it. So why
not let's SHARE it!!

On the other hand, the real truth, supplied by me, is what everyone

sees. It's no wonder your so jealous.

A day late...a dollar short. Ever hear that one?

···

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

[rgmustain]

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

> > > > I know I know, you depend on these long, messy threads to

try

> and confuse anyone who reads them.

>which is not the norm for a geek--we all see how nervous you are

in

your quest to make yourself feel at least half-confident after

you've

been flogged in public yet again. I suggest for that good feeling

of

being superior, bo on back in and boss your wife around again.
That'll get your confidence back up there, for sure! Make believe
she's me and it'll climb that much faster. Go ahead---give it your
best shot like you do all the time! Never mind you've never had the
upper hand with me. Just "make believe" (now that's not hard for a
pathological addict todo, is it???) you're pushing a REAL MAN

around

and you'll be set free!!
> > >
> > > Now, who is the wordy one? It looks like I hit a nerve again.
Rob obviously thought that posting a response, with the proof of

his

> > lies deleted, that he could make it go away. LMAO.
> >
> > That hurt, didn't it!
>
> No, not in the least. I got a good laugh at all of your babbling.

That REALLY hurt, didn't it!

Is your babbler stuck? Did I mention repetitive?

It's OK, little dicky. I understand your
pain here, seeing that you realize other people can see how you

boss

the wife around and all. You can use my nanky. And good. that's the
sign of a direct hit. Whenever you try to weasel out of a topic you
simply post RIV and hope it all just goes away.

LMAO. I really think his babbler IS stuck. Same words over and over
again. No facts, no logic, just the same old drivel. Rob, I think you
better take that babbler in for some repairs. Maybe a 2 million
babble checkup.

> Sorry, you're the only one who deletes the body of threads. Did

you

> think the archives would vanish as well. Are you a complete moron?

And now comes the denial brought on by struggling to feel confident
that you make any sense. Keep it up--nothing but enjoyment on this
end! But uh-oh.....I'm baaaack! You'll have to suffer thru all
your nightmares about me because I deliver the truth about your
phoniness, and you support it with your stupidity.

Make that a 3 million babble checkup.

> No, everyone skims over your babbling so easily. All those words
just go down the tube without having there intended effect.

Here's a flash, little dicky....they're all for only YOU!! I

already

see your pain here and you never were any good at hiding it. So why
not let's SHARE it!!

Yawn. Robbie pretty much just admitted to being a complete moron.
Everyone else can see your words never effect me. Especially after
the first two or three thousand times you babble exactly the same
thing. Ever hear the story of Chicken Little?

>On the other hand, the real truth, supplied by me, is what

everyone

sees. It's no wonder your so jealous.

A day late...a dollar short. Ever hear that one?

It's your middle name, Rob Adlads Singer. And, just another reason
for your jealousy.

[Rob_Singer1]

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > > > > I know I know, you depend on these long, messy threads to
try and confuse anyone who reads them....which is not the norm for

a geek--we all see how nervous you are in your quest to make yourself
feel at least half-confident after you've been flogged in public yet
again. I suggest for that good feeling of being superior, bo on back
in and boss your wife around again. That'll get your confidence back
up there, for sure! Make believe she's me and it'll climb that much
faster. Go ahead---give it your best shot like you do all the time!
Never mind you've never had the upper hand with me. Just "make
believe" (now that's not hard for a pathological addict todo, is
it???) you're pushing a REAL MAN around and you'll be set free!!

> > > >
> > > > Now, who is the wordy one? It looks like I hit a nerve

again.

> Rob obviously thought that posting a response, with the proof of
his
> > > lies deleted, that he could make it go away. LMAO.
> > >
> > > That hurt, didn't it!
> >
> > No, not in the least. I got a good laugh at all of your

babbling.

>
> That REALLY hurt, didn't it!

Is your babbler stuck? Did I mention repetitive?

the more you read it the more you get an itch you'll never be able to
scratch. Am I THE MASTER or what!

> It's OK, little dicky. I understand your
> pain here, seeing that you realize other people can see how you
boss the wife around and all. You can use my nanky. And good.

that's the sign of a direct hit. Whenever you try to weasel out of a
topic you simply post RIV and hope it all just goes away.

LMAO. I really think his babbler IS stuck. Same words over and over
again. No facts, no logic, just the same old drivel. Rob, I think

you better take that babbler in for some repairs. Maybe a 2 million

babble checkup.

Kinda hard to diffuse the bomb I set about you abusing your wife day
in and day out, huh?? Just gets a little under your skin, right
little dicky??

> > Sorry, you're the only one who deletes the body of threads. Did
you think the archives would vanish as well. Are you a complete

moron?

>
> And now comes the denial brought on by struggling to feel

confident that you make any sense. Keep it up--nothing but enjoyment
on this end! But uh-oh.....I'm baaaack! You'll have to suffer thru
all your nightmares about me because I deliver the truth about your
phoniness, and you support it with your stupidity.

Make that a 3 million babble checkup.

And a triple threat to your sanity!
  

> > No, everyone skims over your babbling so easily. All those

words just go down the tube without having there intended effect.

>
> Here's a flash, little dicky....they're all for only YOU!! I
already see your pain here and you never were any good at hiding

it. So why not let's SHARE it!!

Yawn. Robbie pretty much just admitted to being a complete moron.
Everyone else can see your words never effect me.

Taken from the sticks & stones mentality from growing up! Tey I saw
you geeks a bit differently. You were stomped on, called names,
knocked down, you got up, we knocked you fools down again, and
eventually you started crying out "MOMMY, MOMMY...the cool guys are
hurting me!!" You're really doing the same thing here. If nothing
affected you you'd simply walk away and not have any need to say a
thing. But you're hurtin little dicky, and the pain is REAL!

It's your middle name, Rob Adlads Singer. And, just another reason
for your jealousy.

Now who in the name of Pete is that!? I swear, you are sooo corny and
such a nerd that if I could take a dump on you as you squaeled, I
would!

···

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

[rgmustain]

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

> Seems strange that you would claim credit for having me expose

your

> lies and con. So be it.

As you back into your corner once again....The puppetmaster at work
once again and shining brightly!

Hey, keep up the impotent responses. I just love to watch you
scramble.

>
> > > > Positive? You got the money I got the name!
> > >
> > > I got lots of money, you got con. Me too smart to fall for it.
> >
> > Just how is paying for a name a 'con'?
>
> Because it's of NO value. That's why it's called a con.

But it's YOU who are dying to get the name, little dicky. Are you
saying you have no value in front of everyone now??

Are you really this stupid. How could a care about a nonexistent
name? I just love to see you scramble because everyone knows there
isn't any name. You'll dance and rant all over the place, but you
WILL never produce a name. It's really very simple.

> > You get the name, talk to him,
> > then pay. Or are you saying you're afraid of that reality stick
> > hitting you once again.....
>
> You're the one claiming all this BS. If you can't back it up then
YOU are the one that's afraid. PS. If you had a name you would post
it.

For $10,000--and I KNOW your in dire need of it! that's what i like
about you. You long for something I have, I make you pay if you
really want it, then I get to enjoy watching you squirm and writhe

in

agony after you can't come up with the payment and continue
sufferring! God, can it EVER get any better than this???

Did I mention dance and rant? Yup.
In black and white, Rob proves me right.

> > > > If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done it

by

> > now.
> > >
> > > What more proof do you need? My bank account is an open book.
> >
> > ??? That's proof of what??? C'mon. Prove it by documenting

every

> > session, bank withdrawal, deposit, tax return, and casino/IRS
> record that you keep. Not too hard to do, is it?
>
> Nope. I have them all. I'll let you see them ALL for $10,000 and

an

> admission that I have won exactly as I've claimed.

We've gone thru this before,

Lie.

and you've backed out more times than
Cogngo makes believe he wins. I pay for your proof, you pay $640k

for

mine.

I don't care about yours. You stated that I lose. If you really
believe that, then $10K will get you proof. If you don't believe it
and are asserting a lie, then run away like you always do.

> > C'mon little dicky--here's
> > your chance to wipe all that egg off your face. Show the proof
you
> > claim no one else ever does.
>
> No problem. Get the cash together

Where shall we meet--and bring cash only.

Sorry, but this sad attempt to back out is making you look foolish
again. Do you believe I have lost? If you do then back it up with a
measly $10K. That's all there is to it. If I have lost you get the
$10K back.

> > > > Instead, you choose to suffer through what to a geek must

be

> > > > unbearable embarrassment.
> > >
> > > RIV. And clearly indicative of Rob's position at this time.
He's
> > been
> > > caught in so many lies that I've lost track. He quits
responding
> to
> > > those thread while jumping in and mentioning my name every

time

> he
> > > posts. I wonder if he realizes this justs adds to his
> embarrassment?
> >
> > The more you bring it up the more you show how much you enjoy

the

> > ridiculing you get! And I'm just the guy for the job!!
>
> Doesn't appear that way. You've been running away from my proof

of

> your lies for the last week.

I just love how he operates under the title of being his own worst
enemy....

RIV. Rob has been backed into a corner once again. Of course, we
already know what he will do. He will keep insisting that the bet
should go both ways. Every time he does this is a simple admission
that he TRULY believes APers win. How sweet it is ...

>
> > > > > > You can even throw a few thousand
> > > > > > in there because you played 'tournaments'...and lost

them

> > too. It's like a bunch of clowns being ripped a new one by me
week
> > after week after week.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yup. I can hear the moans ... wait, I didn't hear any.
Could
> > > this
> > > > be another lie? Well, of course it is. Rob couldn't go down
> > without
> > > > > throwing in a few idiotic assertions.
> > > >
> > > > Exactly what I mean when you are getting ripped a new one.
> Kinda
> > > > makes you hold your breath, doesn't it!
> > >
> > > It makes you look impotent and stupid. Works for me.
> >
> > Did that come directly out of where I ripped you a new one?
>
> No, it came from the big hole I ripped in your con. The big
> difference is ... my statement is true.

Little dicky, let me explain something to you. I've ripped you so
many new ones here that you ain't got much left to rip away at! But
what the hey....you're close to death anyway, and you're trying to
get there sooner every time you step into one of your casinos. Our
Father, Who Art In Heaven.........

Please Get Rob To A Psycharitrist As Soon As Possible. AMEN.

> > > > He left you with some common sense and some reality. Truly,
> > foreign entities to a theorist wearing blinders.
> > >
> > > Once more Rob avoids providing any reasonable process;

asserts

> some
> > > nonsense; and runs away and hides. Wait, I think I just
detected
> > > another pattern, tell me Robbie, what should I hold?
> >
> > You're Robbie isn't hiding, to your discomfort little

dickey....

> He's
> > right here, constantly belittling you and commanding you do do

my

> > every beck & call.....
>
> But, Rob, I saw a pattern and you didn't tell me what to hold.

Gee,

> what a disappointment.

I've got the feeling you live a LIFETIME of disappointments---ask

the

missus.

What, nothing to hold? What a surprise. Of course, he has no clue
about any patterns or he would have posted something long ago. Rob,
you make this so easy.

>
> >
> > > > > > To say he wins because of some
> > > > > > > nebulous claim of detecting patterns is about the

same

as
> > > > > claiming hitting the hold button a few times increases
wins.
> > > > Actually, the latter is a definable and testable process.
It's
> > > worth
> > > > more.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Um....not a good effort there, little dicky. You don't
> > > understand it and obviously don't have his talent. Save your
> > dignity and just admit it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Robbie can't refute my logic once again. RIV steps in and
> tells
> > > us why.
> >
> > And here it is again! You just can't handle it when told of
another
> > human being living that has more intelligence than you and it's
> > PROVEN!
>
> Is this the same intelligence that came up with "golf balls" or
> the "coin flip" BS? Need I say more.
>
> > And there I am....watching you hurt and enjoying the agony!

> > > > When all you can come up with is 'hit the hold button' the
flow
> > of illogic begins to overpower. Save your dignity....heed those
> words.
> > >
> > > No, what I came up with is a process that is one-step better
than
> a
> > > mythical pattern detection one. It has a process (however
> > > worthless) , you have none.
> >
> > "The process of 'hit the hold button'. MY, what GENIUS!
>
> And that puts you where .... One step below.

Below what--a theory that you live?? No thanks--I'll take my

superior

position to you that I've always enjoyed.

You enjoy looking foolish? Who would have thunk? However, I'll be
honest, you're doing a great job of it.

>
> > I'm sensing
> > more and more envy with every foot you stick in your mouth. And
> > you're reaching for them now!
>
> You're scrambling on every post. You duck every factual statement
and
> assert more BS. It's good to see you behave this way. It's most
> likely a preamble to your next exit.

And it looks like you just found another foot to pile into the

mouth.

Every dumb statement you make = another foot.

RIV.

>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > The only thing I've seen so far is an unverifiable
claim.
> > > Even
> > > > > > Bob isn't sure he hasn't simply been lucky.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then it all went right thru that big ol' hole in your
head
> > > again.
> > > > > He
> > > > > > says he's been lucky, and even luckier when he applies
his
> > > > pattern-detection skills. but that hurts you, doesn't it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Doesn't have any effect on me.
> > > >
> > > > Of course not, and he predicted it wouldn't because of your
> bias
> > > and geek-logic long ago.
> > >
> > > Sorry, little man, I've already said I believe Bob has won.
> >
> > Um, if you have to change the subject to feel better after

being

> > slapped down and kicked, better keep doing it with your wife.

What's the matter--cat got your tongue on that one?? You personify
the typical hide-and-go-geek. You're a BIG MAN yelling at your wife
in the kitchen, but here when you get whipped around, you can't

hold

back the crybaby stuff.

RIV. So, yelling at your wife is one of your problems? Go get help,
you really need it.

> > What is
> > > unverifiable is whether his undefinable special plays had any
> part
> > in
> > > it. You'd think that someone who claims no one will listen to
him
> > > would jump at the chance to discuss them. Instead he runs

away

> and
> > > refuses to discuss them. The only logical conclusion anyone

can

> get
> > > out of this is he has no idea whether these "unorthodox"

plays

> have
> > > had any impact on his results.
> >
> > Here's a news flash specifically for little dicky: HE CAME ON,
> > EXPLAINED IT ALL,
>
> Still waiting for you to write it down. If he "EXPLAINED IT ALL",
> this should be a trivial task.

Just do your geeky thing and search. What? You don't have anything
better to do and you know it. You and the wife lost feelings for

each

othere--save for the GAMBLING DAY JITTERS--long, long ago.

RIV. This is very descriptive of Rob's relationship to his wife. A
sad picture to say the least.

>
> > IT MADE PERFECT SENSE TO THOSE WHO WANTED TO
> > UNDERSTAND IT,
>
> And you still can't write it down.

And you still can't write it down

>
> > THEN HE LEFT SAYING GEEKS LIKE YOU WOULD NEVER GET IT
> > ANYWAY.
>
> Lie, he never said that.

When you do your search you'll see it....as much as it must hurt
inside.

Lie.

>
> > Seems like he took your self-labeled 'genius' label away from
> > you in plain sight!
>
> He comes in and claims a pattern detection theory. Never says how
he
> does it and exits quickly ducking every question regarding his
> approach ... You are looking more foolish by the moment.

And just why would he waste MORE time explaining it AGAIN to you

when

you don't want it to be true, you could never handle the truth, and
iit would probably drive you so nuts you'd kill the dog!

LMAO. I've agreed to try it out. What more can I do? Just write it
down.

>
> > > > > > That's funny.....I've already read what he wrote and I
> > > understand it. Now where'd you say you went to school?
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, you write down the process.
> > > >
> > > > How about "OK, YOU go back and READ the process"!
> > >
> > > Can't do it, can you? I rest my case.
> >
> > I don't want to do your work. You have the problem, fix it.
>
> I have no problem. You've claimed he has a process. You've

claimed

> you understand this process. You can't write it down. Even a cave
man could see the the contradiction in your story.

Do your search and stop whining. Not our problem you haven't the
reading comprehension of the rest of us.

LMAO. Do I detect a lack of a written process? Do I detect continued
scrambling to avoid it? Do I see a Robbie boy making a fool out of
himself? If you answered YES to all 3 questions you get an A.

>
>You've seen all the clear explanations, and the geek
> in
> > you rejects them. We're right/you're wrong. simple as that.

Since

> it
> > bothers you so, go take it out on your wife like you probably

do

> all
> > the time. It's almost impossible to visualize the sufferring

she

> must
> > go thru with you. You're soooo neurotic, in need of

documentation

> on
> > every issue that fits YOUR agenda, and when you & she argue,

you

> > remain in a state of denial that she's right. Man, you must

have

> her
> > trapped in some kind of bizzare relationship!
>
> LMAO. Intense babbling always means RIV is getting his way.

A direct hit again. It's a bit sad and almost unbelievable, but you
confirm my 'assertions' every time you do your dance.

A shorter babble, but a babble nonetheless. Still waiting for that
process ...

> > > You've been reading it for a couple of days now. Write down

the

> > > process and we'll get a group together to use it and track

the

> > > results. It so simple a cave man could figure it out (sorry
> geico).
> >
> > "sorry GEICO??" Huh? How corny can you be??? So drop the stall
and
> > let's see it.
>
> I just did, moron. Go back to the 4th grade ... and this time pay
> attention.

Now drop the drawers so we can all see where your brains are

located

in plain view!

Right on cue, Rob proves to everyone that he has 4th grade intellect.
Thanks.

>
> > > > > > And while you're at it, prove to
> > > > > > us that you 'win' with your nerd method by providing
> > verifiable
> > > > > > substantiation > > > > So when challenged to provide
exactly what you challenge
> another
> > to
> > > > supply, you deek out thru one of your famous escape routes.
> > You'll
> > > > all class, little dicky.
> > >
> > > Whatsa matta, chicken man, the truth hurts? Let's see YOUR
> results.
> > > YOU brought it up. PROVE that you have won.
> >
> > Now you're asking for MY results again? Why, you want to be
> > embarrassed again?? Just prove you win and I'll save you the
anger
> of
> > seeing REAL results.
>
> Backing down? In front of everyone? This is not like you Robbie.
> Could it be your publisher TOLD you to stop the betting or hit

the

> road? Now, you have nothing to fall back on. Come on, chicken-

man,

> you started this, show us your results. I've already offered up
mine to you.

Oh, you want my results--go to my site and weep. If you have any
weeping left in you after the beating you keep absorbing here!

No, I don't want to see your lies and I really don't care about your
results. I want you to prove to everyone else that you're not lying.

>
> > > > > > What you do know is that I'M psychic. I can see right
> through
> > > you
> > > > > > all the time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is that why you make yourself look foolish so often? It
must
> be
> > > > > that "gofer goof ball" in you that does it.
> > > >
> > > > Right thru you, little dicky....right thru you.
> > >
> > > LMAO. Is that why you quit responding to the threads where I
> > > demonstrate that you have lied? You better get those eyes
checked
> > > out.

> Sorry, I didn't write that. Your damaged brain must be short
> circuiting as well.

Denial. What a surprise.

Once again editing a thread to hide your incompetence. You still
can't figure out that everyone ALREADY saw you screw up.

>
> > You're so confused right
> > now
>
> I think it's pretty clear who's confused.

Pee Wee Herman. You always say what I say every time you want to

quit

the thread. Ever notice that?

Sorry, I have no desire to quit any thread. That's your balliwick.

>
> > you don't know whether you're coming or going! Kinda just a tad
> > bit different than that MANLY control you exert over your poor
> addict
> > wife, huh???

> > > > > If you think being lucky constitutes intelligence, then

you

> are
> > > far more stupid than I can put into words.
> >
> > Being smart constitutes intelligence....as in taking the win

home

> and
> > not worrying about your phantom bucks. Being a pessimist is

just

> > another trait of a pathological losing gambler. You're an open,
> silly
> > but sad book.
>
> You already responded to this statement before. Are you drinking
this
> early in the day again?

It's twice the fun burying you a second time!

Yup. Robbie looking stupid twice is twice as much fun.

>
> > > >
> > > > Being lucky thru the use of intelligent special plays.

Sorry,

> but
> > > you can cry all you want.
> > >
> > > Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.
> >
> > Not surprising. It goes right thru that geek armor and to the
heart
> > of the matter.
>
> RIV. Making idiotic plays is at the very heart of your con, that
much
> is true.

Yup, it's idiotic winning, what was it....$100,000??! Out of your
league we know. But it's an irritant nonetheless.

Do you really think more lies on top of your current set of lies will
change anyone's mind? LMAO.

>
> > >
> > > > > We're talking about special plays and I wouldn't waste my
> time
> > > > > reading yours. Is that 4th grade reading comprehension
you're
> > > > > displaying?
> > > >
> > > > Oh that's right. You've already admitted not really knowing
> what
> > > they
> > > > entail. Oh dear.
> > >
> > > I know all I need to know.
> >
> > The typical reply from the person who is desperately trying to
end the discussion before he looks too stupid.
>
> RIV.

See.

Absolutely. It's as obvious as it gets. Not unlike that last little
blunder where you claimed only 8 losses on one hand and 31 on
another ... followed immediately by ignoring the thread when you
caught.

> > You advocate making a negative play. What
> > > more is there? It's equivalent to telling a baseball player

to

> > swing
> > > at a few pitches with his eyes closed because he might get
lucky.
> > > Sure, it could happen, but over time it's a losing plan.
> >
> > A "negitive play" according to little dicky: Dealt QQQAK with 2-
to-
> > the-royal. Hold AKQ, win $100,000. THAT'S QUITE THE NEGATIVE
PLAY,
> > HEY GOOFBALL!!!!!!!!!!!! You're really a vp clown, right?
>
> Anyone can make up a story like that.

Oh, so now, in your need to make it all 'go away' because it gives
you heartburn to know I win so much, you say it didn't happen. If
that's what makes you feel better, then you have to do it. but I

KNOW

you lie awake at night thinking, worrying, and agonizing about it
night after night after night. And I like it!

RIV. Lies on top of lies. Rob, you've been nailed so many times you
no longer have an ounce of credibility. These impotent responses only
certify everything I say. How sweet it is ...

The number of times you've been
> caught in lies this week alone makes it very obvious this NEVER
> happened. Not to mention that you would hit this 1 out of 1081
tries
> on average. In that time, playing $25 9-6 DDB (or equivalent) you
> would end up losing over $540000 by making this play. I think you
> should try another lie. So, back to the baseball analogy. Let's
hear you scramble some more.

Sorry to burst your geek-bubble, but two gurus friends of your
already had the same hair on your butt over this as you do, and the
W2G went to my publisher's office and they saw it. And it wasn't

DDB.

It was on BP. The special play on DDB to hold the Q's doesn't come
into effect until you're playing your 155th credit with no cash

outs,

and it never comes into play on SDBP.

Getting a W2G doesn't mean you got it making an idiotic play. Lies
on top of lies, it's all you do.

> > > > > > then read Bob's post one more time. Then you have
> permission to take a cold shower.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why? It still provides no information. Do you
> > think "unorthodox" conveys any usable information? Is your

brain

> > permanently damaged?
> >
> > ANY information would seem to be useful whether you understand

it

> or not.
>
> Then provide some.

Still waiting ...

>
> > You clearly have trouble opening up and taking in any info
> > transfer unless it's an exact fit for your thin pipeline.
>
> It can't fit in any pipeline until you provide it.

Still waiting ...

> > > > > > > > So now Bob's a liar too--only you're refraining

from

> > > calling him that??
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I assume he either misread or misinterpreted or,
another
> > very
> > > > > > likely situation, the writer was confused. We've
certainly
> > seen
> > > > > that
> > > > > > in most of Rob's writings.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Of course he was confused, little dicky.....of COURSE

he

> was!
> > > No
> > > > > one
> > > > > > could ever POSSIBLY have more insight and knowledge

than

> our
> > > own
> > > > > > little dicky.....
> > > > >
> > > > > Not in this area. They might have equivalent knowledge,

but

> not
> > > > more.
> > > >
> > > > Ah-ha HAHAHA!! Help me someone--I'm ready to pass out friom
> > > > LAUGHTER!!!!!
> > >
> > > RIV. Rob's been caught trying to sound important as another
> > > embarrassing moment approaches.
> >
> > A geek who thinks no one knows more than him....in a world full
of
> > geeks!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!!
>
> Don't believe me? Find one.

Obviously, I know much more than you and have far more life
experience than you can even dream of if your nights weren't so

full

of nightmares from being made the fool here. But I'm not the geek
you're looking for. Just about anyone will do, seeing that you've
also proven how incompetent your so-called 'programmer skills' are.
Once you shed the light on that subject, you put capital letters in
the word FOOL.

Translation: Robbie is scrambling. I'll say it again ... find one.

>Now, don't you think a simple tool can be powerful? Don't you

think

simple tools can be used in creative ways? You really should think
before you post next time.

But you're simple, and you're not powerful! Next!

I'm powerful enough to expose you and your con. That's the only power
I relish here.

> > > > >They do what they are programmed
> > > > > to do. To make a statement like Bob did is nonsense to

even

a
> > > > novice programmer. And, I already explained exactly how
mirror
> > > > results could occur. You're being foolish again, little man.
> > > >
> > > > This is so funny. You're being humiliated in your own

field,

> and
> > > the
> > > > best part is, you're BURYING YOURSELF with every word you
write!
> > >
> > > Of course I am ... as Robbie's embarrassment builds.

As we watch you continue to bury yourself deeper and deeper.....

RIV. LMAO.

> >
> > This is almost too funny! He's being made a fool of by anyone

and

> > everyone IN HIS OWN FIELD that he claims he's the expert's

expert

> > at....and he still plays the boy on the whipping post!!!
>
> Nice try, but your babbling only means you WERE embarrassed.

Get it? IN YOUR OWN FIELD!! You're such a failure and you don't

even

know it! HAHAHAHAHA!!! somebody PLEASE help me before my gut
> SPLITS!!!!!!!!!!!

Hollow doesn't even express the lack of confidence Robbie is showing
by posting the same drivel over and over again. Does he really think
posting "HAHAHAHAHA" is supposed to convince us he's laughing? Poor
little Robbie, cornered with nowhere to run.

> > > > > > > > Is everyone supposed to be stupid and ignorant
without
> > > > > > > > knowledge of anything pertinent except you?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In this case, it appears so. I know what I'm talking
> about
> > > and
> > > > > > could write a coin-flip simulator in less that a day
> myself.
> > > All
> > > > it
> > > > > > would take is deleting a lot of code from my VP

simulator.

> > > > > >
> > > > > > You apparently don't know as much as you think you do.
Bob
> > > > wouldn't lie about that because he has no reason to.
> > > >
> > > > > Like I said, there are several possible reasons for his
> > > confusion,
> > > > > lying is your game.
> > > >
> > > > So now he's not lying. Which is it?
> > >
> > > I see, you want to get a jump on your embarrassment. OK, if

you

> go
> > > back and look at my response, I said "lying is your game".
LMAO.
> > > Don't you understand that "your" refers to you, moron. Your
poor
> > > reading skills have done you in once again.
> >
> > Your usual and perpetually baseless "go back and look"

nonsense.

>
> It's right above for everyone to read.
>
> > Those of us who have reading comprehension have zero need

to 'go

> > back' like an unsure geek would do. Oh my God, are you for
real???
>
> Your hollow words betray your embarrassment.

Are you for real?

Yes, I am ... and you can't stand that. Like I said before "lying is
your game". Try to read it more carefully this time.

> > > > > > I make you look small
> > > > > > enough by firing a truth barrage at you every day.

Accept

> the
> > > > fact that you were one-upped this time,
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, tell you what. I'll bet you $10,000 that I can

produce

a
> > > > program
> > > > > that correctly simulates a coin toss using a standard

PRNG

> and
> > > > > produces results favoring either heads and tails. You can
> have
> > > > > anybody you want check the code and I will change it if
they
> > find
> > > a
> > > > > problem. How about it? ... Now, you know how it really
feels
> to
> > > > > be "one-upped".
> > > >
> > > > Hmmmm....I did a little research on this while you were
> > scrambling
> > > > around trying to figure out how to respond to all the logic
> > you're
> > > > made to take in. I found out that the 'head' side had

slighty

> > > higher
> > > > weight in every coin except 50c. Are you capable of
programming
> > > that
> > > > in?
> > >
> > > ROTFLMAO. Sorry, while I take a break and catch my breath.

This

> is
> > > where Rob faces TOTAL humiliation. If the head has a "slighty
> > higher
> > > weight" then we all know it will come up more. The larger the
> > weight
> > > the more it will come up. We also know that is NOT what Bob
> stated.
> > > He just said a "coin toss". Everyone reading his post
understood
> > that
> > > he meant a FAIR coin toss, otherwise he wouldn't have

mentioned

> the
> > > small .002% variation. You've really stuck your nose in it

now.

> How
> > > does it smell?
> >
> > HELLO McFLY??!! Ther is a SLIGHTLY HIGHER WEIGHT on the head

side

> > whether you like it or not!
>
> Of what, your beer? We're talking SIMULATED coin tosses, moron,

you

> know, there aren't really any coins involved. Do I have to spell

it

> out of you again?

Wishy-washing the words will not change the known fact about the

head

side of a coin. Struggle with it as you will, you're geek-

upbringing

causes your pain at these things and nothing else. Don't blame me

for

your agony on this one!Is that why you're in such a defensive
> > posture--you have to actually input the CORRECT parameters and
you don't want to??? What a fake!

This is too good to be true. Lets take a quick poll and see what
people think of when someone uses a coin toss as an example. You got
it, a 50-50 chance at getting a result. I find this scrambling of
yours to be especially insightful of the extremes Rob will take
instead of taking his lumps like a man.

>
> LMAO. First you state I'm not able to understand a simulated coin
> toss program and then switch it to a real coin toss. You really
need to cut back on those drinks. Here's what Bob said.

Oh boy!--I made him do it again! What a nerd!!

Let's see ... You made me quote words that prove you are full of
it ... Good job.

> "... that in a million flips of a coin on computer simulation,

that

> heads would come up more often by a very very small percentage of
> something like .002%" ... Do you see anything about a weighted

coin-

> toss?

Could it just possibly be that's because you didn't paste all of

his

wording here?? Now could it??? Caught with your pants down around
your ankles again little dicky. Yuk! Please pull them back up!!

I only posted Bob's words relative to the coin toss. Did you also
want the words where he professes some kind of pattern recognition
capability and then provides no description of it. LMAO. I'll gladly
post those for you too.

> > You just proved to all how you operate. With a simple program

on

a coin flip you can't do it properly. Oh Jehovah, help this poor
> man....
>
> Now it's back to a program again. You are drunk aren't you?

What's the matter, your geek-language getting to you a little....

Now that we've all seen Robbie's flip-flop on the coin-toss, we can
snicker at his incompetence even more.

>
> > >
> > > > > > > > He just told you....AGAIN. He 'discerns' short-term
> > > patterns.
> > > > > > Some people just may have that ability--even if you
don't.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If "some people" have this ability then why can't

they

> > > explain
> > > > it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I explained mine and he explained his.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, you have provided no repeatable process. You only

claim

> it
> > > like
> > > > a typical con man. Put up or shut up.
> > > >
> > > > It's all been explained and said, little dicky. You can't
> accept
> > > it,
> > > > then like I said, cry me a river.....
> > >
> > > Still waiting for that process. How sweet it is ...
> >
> > Cry cry cry....like a little lost boy. It'll do you good.
>
> Still waiting ...

And still crying. You and your 'processes'! HAHAHA! What a noodle-
brain!

Still waiting ... I wonder if Rob realizes that each time he passes
up a chance to post a process he simply confirms to everyone that
there is none.

>All you have to write down the steps that you
> > > follow
> > > > in recognizing the "pattern" and then define how that

effects

> > your
> > > > > future plays.
> > > >
> > > > HELLO Einstein & McFLY!! The 'pattern' only shows up at the
> > > machines
> > > > and there are no 'steps' to it unless and until the machine
> > > performs.
> > >
> > > Give me a second, but I just can't stop laughing. How many
times
> > have
> > > you used this con man BS? "I can't explain it to you, but

TRUST

> > me".
> > > Rob, you are hilarious and I'm sure that RIV is celebrating.
> >
> > You'll need more than a second to read it right. By now,
> > any 'programmer' who had any idea would know pattern

recognition.

>
> Robbie doesn't even understand what "know pattern recognition"
means,
> do you little man?

I see you're trying to save a little face here and just in case the
other engineers are reading, you now will try to win their

confidence

by BS'ing and squirming. sorry, little dicky. You're just not that
smart, and I've proven it beyond your momma's grave.

ROTFLMAO. Nice try to avoid my statement. What does "know pattern
recognition" mean?

If you did you would have explained the process
> long ago. You see, pattern recognition can be explained using
simple
> words like "If you see a card in 6 out of 7 hands ..", etc.

There's

> no magic. They don't call it a "pattern" for nothing. LMAO.

And you further your embarrassment. Incredible! I didn't know the
human soul could take that kind...and this kind...of punishment!
Doesn't work like that little dicky--accept that you just have no
idea and there are smarter people in this world and right here,

than

you.

Need I say more. All Rob can do is babble more nonsense. I even gave
you a hint and you failed miserably.

>
> > and
> > you complain that I continue to say "You're FIRED"? Just be

happy

> you
> > never had to face me in your working days. What a fake!!
>
> Rob's bluff has been called. He laid down his cards and they were
> losers.

My only regret in life is that you never were good enough to get

into

a company I worked for so I could fire you for being a fake, for

your

incompetence, and for who knows what vides you had back them to go
along with your geekiness!

Yup. I was only "good enough" to get into a company with nearly $100
billion in revenue every year. LMAO. Could you try a little harder ...

>
> > >
> > > > All the intelligent gambler need do is follow the card
> > > sequences/hand
> > > > occurrences and the answer is right there. You can't do it?
> Then
> > > cry
> > > > me another river.
> > >
> > > Just follow the UNDEFINED "card sequences/hand occurrences".
> Isn't
> > > this exactly like my student/Robbie example I gave last time?
> This
> > is so funny, I am totally amazed a grown man could be this

stupid.

> >
> > As Bob said, geeks would never want to understand the process

so

> > they'll reject any and all efforts to do it.
>
> Nope, provide a process and I'll try it. Still waiting.

Exactly what he said. now you're denying that, so why would you do
anything but deny everything that didn't have your signature to it?

I didn't deny it, I'm still waiting for the process so I can try it.
Hey, keep making youself look foolish, I love it.

Not only are you incompetent in your own so-called 'field' you
probably have no friends because of your attitude. One thing's for
sure--you get a lot of laughs from every direction just by making
believe you're somebody when you're not.You're your own worst
enemy, little dicky. you're fighting yourself over this and you
don't ever want to come to a conclusion. It'll just hurt too much
for the pain-hating geek to handle.

RIV. Once again we get a little insight into Rob's life. No one
respected him. They all laughed at him. Can anyone doubt why? He
probably tried to lie and bully his way through the job. He got
caught and he got fired.

> > > > You have this weak tirade
> > > > going on and all you can do is rant and then cry. Never any
> > facts. All accusations simply because you feel inferior and you
> like
> > > crying in the rain.You have yet to find a way to protect you
from
> > the undeniable truth. I wish I could say I feel your

pain....but

> > > you so deservedly get the whole enchilada every time you ask
for
> it.
> >
> > > If I lost all the time as you claim, then my bank account
should
> be
> > > dwindling. Instead it keeps going up. So, do you want to see

my

> > bank account or would you rather keep making foolish claims? We
all
> > know the answer to this one.
> >
> > Sounds like a trick the Queen uses. Keep 'borrowing' from her

and

> the
> > boy friend's 401k, stuff the bank account so there's always
plenty
> of
> > gambling money around, then piss it away on the machines.
>
> No problem, you can see the 401Ks as well. Both bank accounts,
mutual funds, the works. Yup, all there for you to see and all it
takes is $10K.

Like you'd just whip them out! HA!

Yup.

You have a history of pathological
lying as well as welching on everything you say. Goes right along
with you posting on-word answers and deleting direct-hits that i

nail

you with. Making believe none of it ever happened---just like how

you

got tossed around in high schol. HAHA!!

RIV. So, do you want to see my records or are you going to back down?

>
> > Yup, you've
> > got something to be proud of there allright! All you addicts

are

> the
> > same. You lose all year, then claim 'you've won because you had
the
> > advantage' every time you played! When you lose you never lose,
and
> > when you win you lose it all back anyway because you have that

A-

D-
> V-
> > A-N-T-A-G-E. Clown video poker at its best!!
>
> The babblemaster returns. So, are you going to just keep babbling
or do you want to see the truth?

the only truth that has ever shown up here is two-fold: First, in
everything I write; Second, when you admitted your wife was the

same

type addict you were. A sour life you are cursed with...and the
missus is cursed with you.

I guess this means Rob is backing down. He claims I lose all the time
and when presented with an opportunity to verify his claim ... all he
does is run for the hills. Robbie, my boy, you really do make this
easy.

[Rob_Singer1]

> > > > > Positive? You got the money I got the name!
> > > >
> > > > I got lots of money, you got con. Me too smart to fall for

it.

> > >
> > > Just how is paying for a name a 'con'?
> >
> > Because it's of NO value. That's why it's called a con.
>
> But it's YOU who are dying to get the name, little dicky. Are you
> saying you have no value in front of everyone now??

Are you really this stupid. How could a care about a nonexistent
name? I just love to see you scramble because everyone knows there
isn't any name. You'll dance and rant all over the place, but you
WILL never produce a name. It's really very simple.

Too many words for you little dicky. You're confused and bothered
again, and that's not good. i want you to keep your blood pressure at
a manageable level so your medication will be able to work.
  

> > > You get the name, talk to him,
> > > then pay. Or are you saying you're afraid of that reality

stick

> > > hitting you once again.....
> >
> > You're the one claiming all this BS. If you can't back it up

then

> YOU are the one that's afraid. PS. If you had a name you would

post

> it.
>
> For $10,000--and I KNOW your in dire need of it! that's what i

like

> about you. You long for something I have, I make you pay if you
> really want it, then I get to enjoy watching you squirm and

writhe

in
> agony after you can't come up with the payment and continue
> sufferring! God, can it EVER get any better than this???

Did I mention dance and rant? Yup.
In black and white, Rob proves me right.

>
> > > > > If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done

it

by
> > > now.
> > > >
> > > > What more proof do you need? My bank account is an open

book.

> > >
> > > ??? That's proof of what??? C'mon. Prove it by documenting
every
> > > session, bank withdrawal, deposit, tax return, and casino/IRS
> > record that you keep. Not too hard to do, is it?
> >
> > Nope. I have them all. I'll let you see them ALL for $10,000

and

an
> > admission that I have won exactly as I've claimed.
>
> We've gone thru this before,

Lie.

> and you've backed out more times than
> Cogngo makes believe he wins. I pay for your proof, you pay $640k
for
> mine.

I don't care about yours. You stated that I lose. If you really
believe that, then $10K will get you proof. If you don't believe it
and are asserting a lie, then run away like you always do.

Explain every fact you'll provide right here, then explain how it is
absolute proof and can not be questioned.
And uh-oh, BTW--I deleted the rest of this looong message because
it's probably all about your attempt to save face on this bet. Not
much more to it than what's here. Prove something for a change and
stop that whining!

···

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

[rgmustain]

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

> > > > > > Positive? You got the money I got the name!
> > > > >
> > > > > I got lots of money, you got con. Me too smart to fall

for

it.
> > > >
> > > > Just how is paying for a name a 'con'?
> > >
> > > Because it's of NO value. That's why it's called a con.
> >
> > But it's YOU who are dying to get the name, little dicky. Are

you

> > saying you have no value in front of everyone now??
>
> Are you really this stupid. How could a care about a nonexistent
> name? I just love to see you scramble because everyone knows

there

> isn't any name. You'll dance and rant all over the place, but you
> WILL never produce a name. It's really very simple.

Too many words for you little dicky.

Now you're back to "too many words". Can't you ever make up your mind?

You're confused and bothered
again, and that's not good. i want you to keep your blood pressure

at

a manageable level so your medication will be able to work.

I called another one.

> > > > You get the name, talk to him,
> > > > then pay. Or are you saying you're afraid of that reality
stick
> > > > hitting you once again.....
> > >
> > > You're the one claiming all this BS. If you can't back it up
then
> > YOU are the one that's afraid. PS. If you had a name you would
post
> > it.
> >
> > For $10,000--and I KNOW your in dire need of it! that's what i
like
> > about you. You long for something I have, I make you pay if you
> > really want it, then I get to enjoy watching you squirm and
writhe
> in
> > agony after you can't come up with the payment and continue
> > sufferring! God, can it EVER get any better than this???
>
> Did I mention dance and rant? Yup.
> In black and white, Rob proves me right.

I guess little Robbie didn't like my poetic response.

>
> >
> > > > > > If you were able to prove you don't lie you'd have done
it
> by
> > > > now.
> > > > >
> > > > > What more proof do you need? My bank account is an open
book.
> > > >
> > > > ??? That's proof of what??? C'mon. Prove it by documenting
> every
> > > > session, bank withdrawal, deposit, tax return, and

casino/IRS

> > > record that you keep. Not too hard to do, is it?
> > >
> > > Nope. I have them all. I'll let you see them ALL for $10,000
and
> an
> > > admission that I have won exactly as I've claimed.
> >
> > We've gone thru this before,
>
> Lie.
>
> > and you've backed out more times than
> > Cogngo makes believe he wins. I pay for your proof, you pay

$640k

> for
> > mine.
>
> I don't care about yours. You stated that I lose. If you really
> believe that, then $10K will get you proof. If you don't believe

it

> and are asserting a lie, then run away like you always do.

Explain every fact you'll provide right here, then explain how it

is

absolute proof and can not be questioned.

No problem.

Fact: You either accept the offer or you don't. Only two possible
choices.
Fact: You didn't accept the offer.
Conclusion: You must believe I do win.

And uh-oh, BTW--I deleted the rest of this looong message because
it's probably all about your attempt to save face on this bet. Not
much more to it than what's here. Prove something for a change and
stop that whining!

Translation: Robbie is getting hammered. How sweet it is ...

[Rob_Singer1]

I don't care about yours. You stated that I lose. If you really

believe that, then $10K will get you proof. If you don't believe it and
are asserting a lie, then run away like you always do.

Explain every fact you'll provide right here, then explain how it is

absolute proof and can not be questioned.

No problem.

Looks like a problem little dicky. Where's the explanations?? HUH???
Think in terms of words that communicate, not numbers. right here. Give
it another try.