vpFREE2 Forums

The Secret Behind vpFREE

> 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.

ROTFLMAO. One more example of little Robbie's intense desire to look
stupid. So, I went back to my previous post and copied the explanation
he must have accidentally deleted.

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.

···

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

>
> > 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.

ROTFLMAO. One more example of little Robbie's intense desire to

look stupid. So, I went back to my previous post and copied the
explanation he must have accidentally deleted.

You're backpeddaling again. That considerably weakens your position
right off the bat. I require a CLEAR explanation of exactly what you
will provide, and a CLEAR explanation of why you believe none of
those doicuments can be challenged as not being alterable to fit your
claims. Simple stuff. Can you do it....or rather, WILL you do it?

···

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

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

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

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

wrote:

> >
> > > 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.

> ROTFLMAO. One more example of little Robbie's intense desire to
look stupid. So, I went back to my previous post and copied the
explanation he must have accidentally deleted.

You're backpeddaling again. That considerably weakens your position
right off the bat. I require a CLEAR explanation of exactly what

you

will provide, and a CLEAR explanation of why you believe none of
those doicuments can be challenged as not being alterable to fit

your

claims. Simple stuff. Can you do it....or rather, WILL you do it?

Chuckle, chuckle. All bank account information will be directly off
the financial institution's web site. As for the 1040. The bank
account information will provide you with verification that the
information that went into the tax return is correct. I can't prove
my w2gs are authentic, but it's pretty obvious that I wouldn't claim
EXTRA income if I didn't have to.

Anything else?

···

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

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

> You're backpeddaling again. That considerably weakens your position

right off the bat. I require a CLEAR explanation of exactly what you
will provide, and a CLEAR explanation of why you believe none of those
doicuments can be challenged as not being alterable to fit your claims.
Simple stuff. Can you do it....or rather, WILL you do it?

Chuckle, chuckle. All bank account information will be directly off
the financial institution's web site. As for the 1040. The bank
account information will provide you with verification that the
information that went into the tax return is correct. I can't prove
my w2gs are authentic, but it's pretty obvious that I wouldn't claim

EXTRA income if I didn't have to. Anything else?

We have authentic W2G's. OK. Onto the 1040. I've been criticized with
this one saying I could easily make up a phoney for whatever purposes
and show a copy of that one. For any year. How do you get around that?
Now the on-line bank account. What is THAT supposed to prove? Where'd
the money come from that went into the bank?? Can it be proven to
absolutely be from gambling, and specifically, video poker, and not
from anywhere or anything else? You've got a lot of holes to fill. so
many that it's not even at the point of laughing about.

···

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

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

> > You're backpeddaling again. That considerably weakens your

position

right off the bat. I require a CLEAR explanation of exactly what

you

will provide, and a CLEAR explanation of why you believe none of

those

doicuments can be challenged as not being alterable to fit your

claims.

Simple stuff. Can you do it....or rather, WILL you do it?

> Chuckle, chuckle. All bank account information will be directly

off

> the financial institution's web site. As for the 1040. The bank
> account information will provide you with verification that the
> information that went into the tax return is correct. I can't

prove

> my w2gs are authentic, but it's pretty obvious that I wouldn't

claim

EXTRA income if I didn't have to. Anything else?

We have authentic W2G's. OK. Onto the 1040. I've been criticized

with

this one saying I could easily make up a phoney for whatever

purposes

and show a copy of that one. For any year. How do you get around

that?

I already stated that all income on the 1040 would correlate to my
financial portfolio. You would have access to both.

Now the on-line bank account. What is THAT supposed to prove?

That it can't be faked. You go to the financial institution's web
site and look at my records. No way to copy that.

Where'd
the money come from that went into the bank?? Can it be proven to
absolutely be from gambling, and specifically, video poker, and not
from anywhere or anything else? You've got a lot of holes to fill.

so

many that it's not even at the point of laughing about.

I think we can all see what's happening here. I've offered to open my
entire financial portfolio, and Rob still backs down. Clearly, he
understands that I would not do this unless I have, in fact, won
exactly as I have claimed.

Now, I wonder why he thinks some extra money would come into play?
Does anyone else get the feeling he has some experience here?

> Where'd the money come from that went into the bank?? Can it be

proven to absolutely be from gambling, and specifically, video poker,
and not from anywhere or anything else? You've got a lot of holes to
fill. So many that it's not even at the point of laughing about.

I think we can all see what's happening here. I've offered to open my
entire financial portfolio, and Rob still backs down. Clearly, he
understands that I would not do this unless I have, in fact, won
exactly as I have claimed.

This is the only issue here that makes any difference, and instead of
offering absolute rationale, little dicky dances around it in a manner
strangely reminiscent of every bet ever proposed with me. So now when
backed into a corner, he simply wants me to 'look the other way'
because he said he can be trusted.

Now, I wonder why he thinks some extra money would come into play?
Does anyone else get the feeling he has some experience here?

Anyone can regularly dump other funds into their account for whatever
reason they choose to. For future purposes so you don't embarrass
yourself again, when you say you can 'prove' you have won, make sure
you actually can do that without scrambling around at the 11th hour
making up excuses and trying to save face by having others 'trust' you.
Here's what I will always require for absolute proof:

1. Trackable bank withdrawals to play with, or other verifiable methods
of where and how you obtained the cash. The IRS doe not accept "I had
the cash in the house" and I don't either.

2. Contemporaneous gambling records of each casino visit. If you have
been audited for the period and the IRS accepts this record as complete
and accurate, we're in business. If not, you must come up with another
method to prove the money said won gambling was in fact won playing
video poker.

3. Re-deposits exactly correlating to the time & amount claimed won or
lost.

4. Bank statements showing any and all deposits made throughout the
period in question, and a description of each.

5. Year-ending 1040 review. W2G's are meaningless because we all win a
lot more than W2G's show.

···

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

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

> > Where'd the money come from that went into the bank?? Can it be
proven to absolutely be from gambling, and specifically, video

poker,

and not from anywhere or anything else? You've got a lot of holes

to

fill. So many that it's not even at the point of laughing about.

> I think we can all see what's happening here. I've offered to

open my

> entire financial portfolio, and Rob still backs down. Clearly, he
> understands that I would not do this unless I have, in fact, won
> exactly as I have claimed.

This is the only issue here that makes any difference, and instead

of

offering absolute rationale, little dicky dances around it in a

manner

strangely reminiscent of every bet ever proposed with me. So now

when

backed into a corner, he simply wants me to 'look the other way'
because he said he can be trusted.

What part of "entire financial portfolio" didn't you understand? Are
you going to claim someone is just giving me the cash?

> Now, I wonder why he thinks some extra money would come into

play?

> Does anyone else get the feeling he has some experience here?

Anyone can regularly dump other funds into their account for

whatever

reason they choose to. For future purposes so you don't embarrass
yourself again, when you say you can 'prove' you have won, make

sure

you actually can do that without scrambling around at the 11th hour
making up excuses and trying to save face by having others 'trust'

you.

Here's what I will always require for absolute proof:

1. Trackable bank withdrawals to play with, or other verifiable

methods

of where and how you obtained the cash. The IRS doe not accept "I

had

the cash in the house" and I don't either.

It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.

2. Contemporaneous gambling records of each casino visit. If you

have

been audited for the period and the IRS accepts this record as

complete

and accurate, we're in business. If not, you must come up with

another

method to prove the money said won gambling was in fact won playing
video poker.

These are pretty much worthless since they can be built to say
anything you want them to say. That said, I have 'em.

3. Re-deposits exactly correlating to the time & amount claimed won

or

lost.

Time is meaningless. The only thing that matters is for all the cash
deposits to match said winnings.

4. Bank statements showing any and all deposits made throughout the
period in question, and a description of each.

It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.

5. Year-ending 1040 review. W2G's are meaningless because we all

win a

lot more than W2G's show.

All there. So, you got that $10K?

By the way, did I mention that Rob seems to have a lot of experience
in these matters? Now that his con has been completely exposed I
think we all know why.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
  
> > > Where'd the money come from that went into the bank?? Can it

be

> proven to absolutely be from gambling, and specifically, video
poker,
> and not from anywhere or anything else? You've got a lot of holes
to
> fill. So many that it's not even at the point of laughing about.
>
> > I think we can all see what's happening here. I've offered to
open my
> > entire financial portfolio, and Rob still backs down. Clearly,

he

> > understands that I would not do this unless I have, in fact,

won

> > exactly as I have claimed.
>
> This is the only issue here that makes any difference, and

instead of offering absolute rationale, little dicky dances around it
in a manner strangely reminiscent of every bet ever proposed with me.
So now when backed into a corner, he simply wants me to 'look the
other way' because he said he can be trusted.

What part of "entire financial portfolio" didn't you understand?

Are you going to claim someone is just giving me the cash?

Here's the corner you've painted yourself into--which is a familiar
site. You say 'entire financial portfilio' yet you must be able to
correlate each casino record with an exact matching deposit--and you
must be able to prove the money came from vp wins. How do you propose
to do that?

>
> > Now, I wonder why he thinks some extra money would come into
play?
> > Does anyone else get the feeling he has some experience here?
>
> Anyone can regularly dump other funds into their account for
whatever
> reason they choose to. For future purposes so you don't embarrass
> yourself again, when you say you can 'prove' you have won, make
sure
> you actually can do that without scrambling around at the 11th

hour

> making up excuses and trying to save face by having

others 'trust'

you.
> Here's what I will always require for absolute proof:
>
> 1. Trackable bank withdrawals to play with, or other verifiable
methods of where and how you obtained the cash. The IRS doe not

accept "I had the cash in the house" and I don't either.

It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.

OK. You can prove that the money you're playing with TODAY came out
of X withdrawal, and what you claimed to have won TODAY is in Y
deposit.

> 2. Contemporaneous gambling records of each casino visit. If you
have been audited for the period and the IRS accepts this record as
complete and accurate, we're in business. If not, you must come up

with another method to prove the money said won gambling was in fact
won playing video poker.

These are pretty much worthless since they can be built to say
anything you want them to say. That said, I have 'em.

As a vp player who files as a professional gambler, I am inclined to
look the other way when someone says something like that. You
probably haven't yet been audited (I can do something about that too)
but if you say they are worthless because you lie about them or
manipulate them, then I have to believe you and you'll have to come
up with another method of proving that you won the deposited money
playing vp.

> 3. Re-deposits exactly correlating to the time & amount claimed

won or lost.

Time is meaningless. The only thing that matters is for all the

cash deposits to match said winnings.

THAT's what's meaningless. Where'd you really get the money? your
portfolio isn't absolute in that respect and given that you have no
qualms about lying to the IRS about your play, you'd certainly lie to
me about it.

> 4. Bank statements showing any and all deposits made throughout

the period in question, and a description of each.

It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.

Including descriptions? No. You have to prove what they're for.

> 5. Year-ending 1040 review. W2G's are meaningless because we all
win a lot more than W2G's show.

All there. So, you got that $10K?

You really looked a lot better on this before you started scrambling
around trying to make up things to support your false reporting here.
Just as in almost everything else you get involved in here, the more
you release information the worse you look. (REASON #1 as to why the
geeks are shut down and removed by the Program Manager when the real
discussions begin). At first you had 60% credibility. Now it's 40%. I
require 100%. Keep trying.

By the way, did I mention that Rob seems to have a lot of

experience

···

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

in these matters? Now that his con has been completely exposed I
think we all know why.

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

> > > > Where'd the money come from that went into the bank?? Can

it

be
> > proven to absolutely be from gambling, and specifically, video
> poker,
> > and not from anywhere or anything else? You've got a lot of

holes

> to
> > fill. So many that it's not even at the point of laughing about.
> >
> > > I think we can all see what's happening here. I've offered to
> open my
> > > entire financial portfolio, and Rob still backs down.

Clearly,

he
> > > understands that I would not do this unless I have, in fact,
won
> > > exactly as I have claimed.
> >
> > This is the only issue here that makes any difference, and
instead of offering absolute rationale, little dicky dances around

it

in a manner strangely reminiscent of every bet ever proposed with

me.

So now when backed into a corner, he simply wants me to 'look the
other way' because he said he can be trusted.
>
> What part of "entire financial portfolio" didn't you understand?
Are you going to claim someone is just giving me the cash?

Here's the corner you've painted yourself into--which is a familiar
site. You say 'entire financial portfilio' yet you must be able to
correlate each casino record with an exact matching deposit--and

you

must be able to prove the money came from vp wins. How do you

propose

to do that?

I don't propose to do that. You're the one who claims I have lost.
I'm was willing to let you see for yourself. You've backed down.

>
> >
> > > Now, I wonder why he thinks some extra money would come into
> play?
> > > Does anyone else get the feeling he has some experience here?
> >
> > Anyone can regularly dump other funds into their account for
> whatever
> > reason they choose to. For future purposes so you don't

embarrass

> > yourself again, when you say you can 'prove' you have won, make
> sure
> > you actually can do that without scrambling around at the 11th
hour
> > making up excuses and trying to save face by having
others 'trust'
> you.
> > Here's what I will always require for absolute proof:
> >
> > 1. Trackable bank withdrawals to play with, or other verifiable
> methods of where and how you obtained the cash. The IRS doe not
accept "I had the cash in the house" and I don't either.

> It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.

OK. You can prove that the money you're playing with TODAY came out
of X withdrawal, and what you claimed to have won TODAY is in Y
deposit.

That's not the way I do it. Over the last winter you will see ONE
withdrawl when I got to LV. You will see several deposits along the
way. Since I deal in smaller denoms I have no reason to run to the
bank every day.

> > 2. Contemporaneous gambling records of each casino visit. If

you

> have been audited for the period and the IRS accepts this record

as

> complete and accurate, we're in business. If not, you must come

up

with another method to prove the money said won gambling was in

fact

won playing video poker.

> These are pretty much worthless since they can be built to say
> anything you want them to say. That said, I have 'em.

As a vp player who files as a professional gambler, I am inclined

to

look the other way when someone says something like that. You
probably haven't yet been audited (I can do something about that

too)

but if you say they are worthless because you lie about them or
manipulate them, then I have to believe you and you'll have to come
up with another method of proving that you won the deposited money
playing vp.

They are worthless because they are simply a written record where
anyone could lie. You should also note that you and IRS are looking
for the exact opposite claims. You think I claim to many wins while
the IRS is looking for unreported wins.

> > 3. Re-deposits exactly correlating to the time & amount claimed
won or lost.
>
> Time is meaningless. The only thing that matters is for all the
cash deposits to match said winnings.

THAT's what's meaningless. Where'd you really get the money? your
portfolio isn't absolute in that respect and given that you have no
qualms about lying to the IRS about your play, you'd certainly lie

to

me about it.

Actually, my portfolio is almost absolute. However, I can see this
point. I brought up the possibility of unreported income in the past
with your claims so it is certainly an issue.

> > 4. Bank statements showing any and all deposits made throughout
the period in question, and a description of each.
>
> It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.

Including descriptions? No. You have to prove what they're for.

The bank deposits only indicates CASH.

> > 5. Year-ending 1040 review. W2G's are meaningless because we

all

> win a lot more than W2G's show.
>
> All there. So, you got that $10K?

You really looked a lot better on this before you started

scrambling

around trying to make up things to support your false reporting

here.

Is that false wins or losses? You have stated both ...

Just as in almost everything else you get involved in here, the

more

you release information the worse you look. (REASON #1 as to why

the

geeks are shut down and removed by the Program Manager when the

real

discussions begin). At first you had 60% credibility. Now it's 40%.

I

require 100%. Keep trying.

I think this has gone far enough. I did all this so everyone could
see exactly WHY it is impossible for Robbie to ever PROVE his claimed
results. The issue of outside cash will always exist and there is NO
way to prove that anyone's claims are valid. For example, Robbie
could restore old cars and sell them for cash. Use that money to
supplement his claims and no one would be the wiser. It was very
satisfying to see Robbie spell out exactly why his own claims are
worthless.

···

>
> By the way, did I mention that Rob seems to have a lot of
experience
> in these matters? Now that his con has been completely exposed I
> think we all know why.

> Here's the corner you've painted yourself into--which is a

familiar site. You say 'entire financial portfilio' yet you must be
able to correlate each casino record with an exact matching deposit--
and you must be able to prove the money came from vp wins. How do you
propose to do that?

I don't propose to do that. You're the one who claims I have lost.
I'm was willing to let you see for yourself. You've backed down.

If you can't do the above then yes, all you'll be doing is letting me
see for myself that you have lost. You finally got it right.

Now, I wonder why he thinks some extra money would come into play?
Does anyone else get the feeling he has some experience here?

> > > Anyone can regularly dump other funds into their account for
> > whatever reason they choose to. For future purposes so you

don't embarrass yourself again, when you say you can 'prove' you have
won, make sure you actually can do that without scrambling around at
the 11th hour making up excuses and trying to save face by having
others 'trust' you.

> > > Here's what I will always require for absolute proof:
> > >
> > > 1. Trackable bank withdrawals to play with, or other

verifiable

> > methods of where and how you obtained the cash. The IRS doe not
> accept "I had the cash in the house" and I don't either.
>
> > It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.
>
> OK. You can prove that the money you're playing with TODAY came

out

> of X withdrawal, and what you claimed to have won TODAY is in Y
> deposit.

That's not the way I do it. Over the last winter you will see ONE
withdrawl when I got to LV. You will see several deposits along the
way. Since I deal in smaller denoms I have no reason to run to the
bank every day.

I understand that. That's exactly the resson for accurate/truthful
and detailed casino records.
  

> > > 2. Contemporaneous gambling records of each casino visit. If
you have been audited for the period and the IRS accepts this

record as complete and accurate, we're in business. If not, you must
come up with another method to prove the money said won gambling was
in fact won playing video poker.

>
> > These are pretty much worthless since they can be built to say
> > anything you want them to say. That said, I have 'em.
>
> As a vp player who files as a professional gambler, I am inclined
to look the other way when someone says something like that. You
> probably haven't yet been audited (I can do something about that
too) but if you say they are worthless because you lie about them

or manipulate them, then I have to believe you and you'll have to
come up with another method of proving that you won the deposited
money playing vp.

They are worthless because they are simply a written record where
anyone could lie. You should also note that you and IRS are looking
for the exact opposite claims. You think I claim to many wins while
the IRS is looking for unreported wins.

Normal, truthful and respectable people DON'T lie on their income.
You win $45 today then you have to report it. If you're trying to
sell me that you won the money playing video poker then it would also
have to be reported as income to the IRS. If you don't, then I'd have
no official choice but to take it as you did not win as you claimed
to have done.

> > > 3. Re-deposits exactly correlating to the time & amount

claimed won or lost.

> >
> > Time is meaningless. The only thing that matters is for all the
> cash deposits to match said winnings.
>
> THAT's what's meaningless. Where'd you really get the money? your
> portfolio isn't absolute in that respect and given that you have

no qualms about lying to the IRS about your play, you'd certainly lie

to me about it.

Actually, my portfolio is almost absolute. However, I can see this
point. I brought up the possibility of unreported income in the

past with your claims so it is certainly an issue.

The 'possibility' is always there---but not with me. You don't file
as a professional gambler and expect to 'get away' with unreported
income. I learned on my first gambling audit in 1999 that if you only
report the W2G wins and expect them to believe you never won less
than $1200 in any visit, they'll get you. they'll also get you for
not showing a withdrawal within a reasonable amount of time of your
casino visits--so your system of a single withdrawal is gonna bite
you down the road. They'll just add in a projected 'win' amount and
add it to your income based on your average track record, and you'd
have no way to dispute it without back-up documentation. That's why
misscrap is worried. She's never told the right ways to do things
because she gets her info from the Queen, who is always looking for
more gambling cash.
  

> > > 4. Bank statements showing any and all deposits made

throughout the period in question, and a description of each.

> >
> > It's all there in the bank's transaction history ONLINE.
>
> Including descriptions? No. You have to prove what they're for.

The bank deposits only indicates CASH.

Then how can that identify every deposit?
  

> > > 5. Year-ending 1040 review. W2G's are meaningless because we
all win a lot more than W2G's show.
> >
> > All there. So, you got that $10K?
>
> You really looked a lot better on this before you started
scrambling around trying to make up things to support your false

reporting here.

Is that false wins or losses? You have stated both ...

It's turned into false 'everything' until you factualize SOMETHING.

> Just as in almost everything else you get involved in here, the
more you release information the worse you look. (REASON #1 as to

why the geeks are shut down and removed by the Program Manager when
the real discussions begin). At first you had 60% credibility. Now
it's 40%. I require 100%. Keep trying.

I think this has gone far enough. I did all this so everyone could
see exactly WHY it is impossible for Robbie to ever PROVE his

claimed results. The issue of outside cash will always exist and
there is NO way to prove that anyone's claims are valid. For example,
Robbie could restore old cars and sell them for cash. Use that money
to supplement his claims and no one would be the wiser. It was very
satisfying to see Robbie spell out exactly why his own claims are
worthless.

100% false. As a professional gambler I keep a GAMBLING ONLY account
that has all transactions only for my gambling trips, posted and
dated, and my casino and IRS records all correlate EXACTLY to my bank
account statement for gaming. There's nothing else in there except
some withdrawals of the profits and interest for buying things when
there's no trips involved. I've even had the 5-year audit to verify
everything -- all of which is why I put up a huge amount against the
fool radio jock. Our normal joint account is used only for bills and
expenses, never is cash taken out, and the deposits are all from my
wife's work--except when we bought the house recently when I made
deposits from my brokerage account. Everything's very precise, clear,
and traceable. And anyone would lose to me if they bet me on my
proof. And when I offerred to pay for the Nevada Arbitrator who's
decision would be final and binding, that's like a final nail in the
coffin of any fool that would bet me. That's why the jock backed off
and that's why you did.

···

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