vpFREE2 Forums

To rgmustain

Maybe you can help me.

I know both AP and Singer strategy. I've been doing my own simulation
on Winpoker using Singer strategy. It is quite tedious. I've read in
your posts that you have done a simulation using Singer strategy. I was
wondering if you and I might could get together, I live in Vegas. I
would like to visit with you and find out if you could, or even want
to, simulate the Singer strategy. I frankly, don't even know if it
would be possible because of the cashouts and back and forth with the
progressions. So far I've played 21 sessions, it has taken me about 2
days off and on. I'm up quite a bit, but I would like many more hands
simulated.

Let me know if you would be interested,
Thanks,
Cody

Maybe you can help me.

I know both AP and Singer strategy. I've been doing my own

simulation

on Winpoker using Singer strategy. It is quite tedious. I've read

in

your posts that you have done a simulation using Singer strategy. I

was

wondering if you and I might could get together, I live in Vegas. I
would like to visit with you and find out if you could, or even

want

to, simulate the Singer strategy.

I will be back in LV in a few weeks and we can get together then if
you would like. Send me an email.

I frankly, don't even know if it
would be possible because of the cashouts and back and forth with

the

progressions.

That part is easy. However, Rob will always claim that his "special
plays" can never be simulated.

So far I've played 21 sessions, it has taken me about 2
days off and on. I'm up quite a bit, but I would like many more

hands

simulated.

You shouldn't waste your time trying to run through the strategies
using winpoker. I just ran a simulation today of 1000 players at 250
sessions with paybacks over 103% and below 97%. This is why it's a
waste of time. Even at 250 sessions there is still a large variance.
How many levels have you been trying? The more levels the higher
number of session wins you would expect. Also, what games are you
playing? That also makes a difference.

Here's a smaller run of 100 players. I used a breakdown here of six
levels (1%), five levels (12%), 4 levels (87%). I wanted to see what
would happen to the session wins using this breadown:

seed = 2343622, 8-5BP 0.99166 10-7DB 1.001725 8-5BP 0.99166 10-6DDB
1.00067 8-5BP 0.99166 9-5 SDB 0.996946 8-5BP 0.99166 9-5 SDB 0.996946
8-5BP 0.99166 9-5TB+ 0.998033 8-5BP 0.99166 9-5TB+ 0.998033
Average hands at level 1 = 600 with 2 royals
Average hands at level 2 = 796 with 4 royals
Average hands at level 3 = 391 with 3 royals
Average hands at level 4 = 478 with 3 royals
Average hands at level 5 = 217 with 1 royals
Average hands at level 6 = 275 with 2 royals
Average hands at level 7 = 140 with 0 royals
Average hands at level 8 = 159 with 0 royals
(Stats not kept for levels 9-12)
Number of wins = 131 averaging 4569.312977
Number of losses = 119 averaging 6177.689076
Subgoal hits = 13.364 Level resets = 7.092 Level losses = 12.928
Average wagered = 46149.52 for payback of 98.816326 (-546.26/session)
Expected payback = 99.542122 Total hands per session = 3059.9
Average bet = 3.016407, CB per session at .2% = 92.29904
Exceeded expection 43 times and 100% 33 times, with CB 33 times
Highest payback = 102.524778, lowest payback = 97.238938
Max wins = 158

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "truthseekr99" <ydoc21@...> wrote:

You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's slide rule
here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no matter how
you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense (methodology) to short-
term play, positive games will end up positive and negative games
negative. Every simulation will always follow that guideline
regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom. And the
reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my special
plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean Zamzow told
me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and offerred to
sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him, but he'd rather
sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to feel 'safe' because he
knows there's validity to what I'm saying.

>
> Maybe you can help me.
>
> I know both AP and Singer strategy. I've been doing my own
simulation
> on Winpoker using Singer strategy. It is quite tedious. I've read
in
> your posts that you have done a simulation using Singer strategy.

I

was
> wondering if you and I might could get together, I live in Vegas.

I

> would like to visit with you and find out if you could, or even
want
> to, simulate the Singer strategy.

I will be back in LV in a few weeks and we can get together then if
you would like. Send me an email.

> I frankly, don't even know if it
> would be possible because of the cashouts and back and forth with
the
> progressions.

That part is easy. However, Rob will always claim that his "special
plays" can never be simulated.

> So far I've played 21 sessions, it has taken me about 2
> days off and on. I'm up quite a bit, but I would like many more
hands
> simulated.

You shouldn't waste your time trying to run through the strategies
using winpoker. I just ran a simulation today of 1000 players at

250

sessions with paybacks over 103% and below 97%. This is why it's a
waste of time. Even at 250 sessions there is still a large

variance.

How many levels have you been trying? The more levels the higher
number of session wins you would expect. Also, what games are you
playing? That also makes a difference.

Here's a smaller run of 100 players. I used a breakdown here of six
levels (1%), five levels (12%), 4 levels (87%). I wanted to see

what

would happen to the session wins using this breadown:

seed = 2343622, 8-5BP 0.99166 10-7DB 1.001725 8-5BP 0.99166 10-6DDB
1.00067 8-5BP 0.99166 9-5 SDB 0.996946 8-5BP 0.99166 9-5 SDB

0.996946

8-5BP 0.99166 9-5TB+ 0.998033 8-5BP 0.99166 9-5TB+ 0.998033
Average hands at level 1 = 600 with 2 royals
Average hands at level 2 = 796 with 4 royals
Average hands at level 3 = 391 with 3 royals
Average hands at level 4 = 478 with 3 royals
Average hands at level 5 = 217 with 1 royals
Average hands at level 6 = 275 with 2 royals
Average hands at level 7 = 140 with 0 royals
Average hands at level 8 = 159 with 0 royals
(Stats not kept for levels 9-12)
Number of wins = 131 averaging 4569.312977
Number of losses = 119 averaging 6177.689076
Subgoal hits = 13.364 Level resets = 7.092 Level losses = 12.928
Average wagered = 46149.52 for payback of 98.816326 (-

546.26/session)

···

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

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "truthseekr99" <ydoc21@> wrote:
Expected payback = 99.542122 Total hands per session = 3059.9
Average bet = 3.016407, CB per session at .2% = 92.29904
Exceeded expection 43 times and 100% 33 times, with CB 33 times
Highest payback = 102.524778, lowest payback = 97.238938
Max wins = 158

Hmmmm. When I ask Rob to explain how he detects "hot" cycles he
couldn't do it. So, I think we can pretty much ignore his ability to
describe the "entire procedure" in any way, shape or form. If this
sounds like a typical con man response, ... Well, you know the
saying ... If it walks like duck ...

···

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

You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's slide rule
here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no matter how
you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense (methodology) to short-
term play, positive games will end up positive and negative games
negative. Every simulation will always follow that guideline
regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom. And the
reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my special
plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean Zamzow told
me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and offerred to
sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him, but he'd rather
sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to feel 'safe' because he
knows there's validity to what I'm saying.

> You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's slide rule
> here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no matter

how you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense (methodology) to
short-term play, positive games will end up positive and negative
games negative. Every simulation will always follow that guideline

regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom. And the
reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my special
plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean Zamzow told
me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and offerred

to sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him, but he'd
rather sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to feel 'safe'
because he knows there's validity to what I'm saying.

Hmmmm. When I ask Rob to explain how he detects "hot" cycles he
couldn't do it. So, I think we can pretty much ignore his ability

to describe the "entire procedure" in any way, shape or form. If this

sounds like a typical con man response, ... Well, you know the
saying ... If it walks like duck ...

You just don't like the fact that Dean Z. is identified ANYWHERE as
having more ability, credibility, sense and capability than you,
don't you....too bad weasel. You radiate jealousy whenever anyone
shows more articulation than you anywhere within that cursed sickness
and problem area of your life--video poker. And I think you'd learn
more than another thing or two if you watched me play and detect
cycles--it'll just cost the nerd $35,000/session. Not a bad price for
such a vp prowess-packing stud, now is it little dicky??? Think of
all the moola you'd be gaining in 'the long-term'!!!

···

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

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

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

> > You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's slide

rule

> > here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no matter
how you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense (methodology) to
short-term play, positive games will end up positive and negative
games negative. Every simulation will always follow that guideline
>regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom. And the
>reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my special
> plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean Zamzow

told

> me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and offerred
to sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him, but he'd
rather sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to feel 'safe'
because he knows there's validity to what I'm saying.
>
> Hmmmm. When I ask Rob to explain how he detects "hot" cycles he
> couldn't do it. So, I think we can pretty much ignore his ability
to describe the "entire procedure" in any way, shape or form. If

this

> sounds like a typical con man response, ... Well, you know the
> saying ... If it walks like duck ...

You just don't like the fact that Dean Z. is identified ANYWHERE as
having more ability, credibility, sense and capability than you,
don't you....too bad weasel.

Dean Z. probably has "more ability, credibility, sense and capability
than" me. Your point? Pretty much anyone can see your entire
procedure is a con and your special elixir, er, plays are the
hook ... PROOF of CON to anyone with a smattering of common sense.
That's the real POINT.

You radiate jealousy whenever anyone
shows more articulation than you anywhere within that cursed

sickness

and problem area of your life--video poker. And I think you'd learn
more than another thing or two if you watched me play and detect
cycles--it'll just cost the nerd $35,000/session. Not a bad price

for

such a vp prowess-packing stud, now is it little dicky??? Think of
all the moola you'd be gaining in 'the long-term'!!!

ROTFLMAO. What great timing. Only a con man would suggest teaching
your ridiculous system for MONEY. Thanks, little man ... How sweet it
is ...

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > > You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's slide
rule
> > > here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no

matter

> how you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense (methodology)

to

> short-term play, positive games will end up positive and negative
> games negative. Every simulation will always follow that

guideline

> >regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom. And the
> >reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my

special

> > plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean Zamzow
told
> > me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and

offerred

> to sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him, but he'd
> rather sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to feel 'safe'
> because he knows there's validity to what I'm saying.
> >
> > Hmmmm. When I ask Rob to explain how he detects "hot" cycles he
> > couldn't do it. So, I think we can pretty much ignore his

ability

> to describe the "entire procedure" in any way, shape or form. If
this
> > sounds like a typical con man response, ... Well, you know the
> > saying ... If it walks like duck ...
>
> You just don't like the fact that Dean Z. is identified ANYWHERE

as

> having more ability, credibility, sense and capability than you,
> don't you....too bad weasel.

Dean Z. probably has "more ability, credibility, sense and

capability than" me. Your point?

Yup, but the part that gets you the most is he's created something
that people want, when all you can do is rumble thru the internet
showing jealousy at anyone who's famous and/or knows how to win.
You've been left in his dust...we can all see that. Get over it.

Pretty much anyone can see your entire procedure is a con and your
special elixir, er, plays are the hook ... PROOF of CON to anyone
with a smattering of common sense. That's the real POINT.

I think there's 2 people here who show enough jealousy over me that
you could line up on your side of the table: Of course you--who
actually idolizes what I do and how I do it; and jimmy, who obviously
is another gaming loser who hates winners and hates it even more when
they talk about it. It's good to see them here and on the same team!
It's always a bonus to get to dismantle and humiliate two for the
price of one!

> You radiate jealousy whenever anyone
> shows more articulation than you anywhere within that cursed
sickness
> and problem area of your life--video poker. And I think you'd

learn

> more than another thing or two if you watched me play and detect
> cycles--it'll just cost the nerd $35,000/session. Not a bad price
for such a vp prowess-packing stud, now is it little dicky??? Think

of all the moola you'd be gaining in 'the long-term'!!!

ROTFLMAO. What great timing. Only a con man would suggest teaching
your ridiculous system for MONEY. Thanks, little man ... How sweet

it is ...

Hmmmm....Ever wonder why everyone else gets trained for free?? Like
the stripper said (that's a girl who dances with her clothes off) if
you've got it, flaunt it! I do....only YOU get to pay for it!!

···

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

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

> > > > You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's

slide

> rule
> > > > here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no
matter
> > how you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense (methodology)
to
> > short-term play, positive games will end up positive and

negative

> > games negative. Every simulation will always follow that
guideline
> > >regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom. And

the

> > >reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my
special
> > > plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean

Zamzow

> told
> > > me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and
offerred
> > to sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him, but

he'd

> > rather sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to feel 'safe'
> > because he knows there's validity to what I'm saying.
> > >
> > > Hmmmm. When I ask Rob to explain how he detects "hot" cycles

he

> > > couldn't do it. So, I think we can pretty much ignore his
ability
> > to describe the "entire procedure" in any way, shape or form.

If

> this
> > > sounds like a typical con man response, ... Well, you know

the

> > > saying ... If it walks like duck ...
> >
> > You just don't like the fact that Dean Z. is identified

ANYWHERE

as
> > having more ability, credibility, sense and capability than

you,

> > don't you....too bad weasel.
>
> Dean Z. probably has "more ability, credibility, sense and
capability than" me. Your point?

Yup, but the part that gets you the most is he's created something
that people want, when all you can do is rumble thru the internet
showing jealousy at anyone who's famous and/or knows how to win.

LMAO. Dean did a fantastic job with winpoker. It's a great tool for
the serious APer. I've used it countless hours to fine tune my winnng
play.

You've been left in his dust...we can all see that. Get over it.

Explain how having a great tool does anything but help me. You really
do love to say the most foolish things.

> Pretty much anyone can see your entire procedure is a con and

your

special elixir, er, plays are the hook ... PROOF of CON to anyone
with a smattering of common sense. That's the real POINT.

I think there's 2 people here who show enough jealousy over me that
you could line up on your side of the table:

Who could ever be jealous of a complete loser like Rob Singer. You
back down on your bets, you constantly lie about your own results,
your only defense is hurling the same impotent and boring insults
over and over again. You are the laughing stock of this forum and all
of Las Vegas. How sweet it is ...

Of course you--who
actually idolizes what I do and how I do it; and jimmy, who

obviously

is another gaming loser who hates winners and hates it even more

when

they talk about it. It's good to see them here and on the same

team!

It's always a bonus to get to dismantle and humiliate two for the
price of one!

Da plane, da plane.

>
> > You radiate jealousy whenever anyone
> > shows more articulation than you anywhere within that cursed
> sickness
> > and problem area of your life--video poker. And I think you'd
learn
> > more than another thing or two if you watched me play and

detect

> > cycles--it'll just cost the nerd $35,000/session. Not a bad

price

> for such a vp prowess-packing stud, now is it little dicky???

Think

of all the moola you'd be gaining in 'the long-term'!!!

> ROTFLMAO. What great timing. Only a con man would suggest

teaching

> your ridiculous system for MONEY. Thanks, little man ... How

sweet

it is ...

Hmmmm....Ever wonder why everyone else gets trained for free?? Like
the stripper said (that's a girl who dances with her clothes off)

if

you've got it, flaunt it! I do....only YOU get to pay for it!!

Ho hum. Another day another retraction. Don't you get tired of
changing your story over and over again? You are the biggest loser in
all of Las Vegas. There's no place hide little man.

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rsing1111" <rsinger1111@>
wrote:
> > > > > You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's
slide
> > rule
> > > > > here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no
> matter
> > > how you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense

(methodology)

> to
> > > short-term play, positive games will end up positive and
negative
> > > games negative. Every simulation will always follow that
> guideline
> > > >regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom. And
the
> > > >reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my
> special
> > > > plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean
Zamzow
> > told
> > > > me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and
> offerred
> > > to sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him, but
he'd
> > > rather sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to

feel 'safe'

> > > because he knows there's validity to what I'm saying.
> > > >
> > > > Hmmmm. When I ask Rob to explain how he detects "hot"

cycles

he
> > > > couldn't do it. So, I think we can pretty much ignore his
> ability
> > > to describe the "entire procedure" in any way, shape or form.
If
> > this
> > > > sounds like a typical con man response, ... Well, you know
the
> > > > saying ... If it walks like duck ...
> > >
> > > You just don't like the fact that Dean Z. is identified
ANYWHERE
> as
> > > having more ability, credibility, sense and capability than
you,
> > > don't you....too bad weasel.
> >
> > Dean Z. probably has "more ability, credibility, sense and
> capability than" me. Your point?
>
> Yup, but the part that gets you the most is he's created

something

> that people want, when all you can do is rumble thru the internet
> showing jealousy at anyone who's famous and/or knows how to win.

LMAO. Dean did a fantastic job with winpoker. It's a great tool for
the serious APer. I've used it countless hours to fine tune my

winnng play.

Typical weeny-response whenever a geek gets caught showing envy---
throw in some praise so as not to look the complete envious fool. Too
late little dicky....

> You've been left in his dust...we can all see that. Get over it.

Explain how having a great tool does anything but help me. You

really do love to say the most foolish things.

Gee, I didn't think I'd see this much jealousy from you over another
math geek! HAHAHAHA!!!!

> > Pretty much anyone can see your entire procedure is a con and
your
> special elixir, er, plays are the hook ... PROOF of CON to anyone
> with a smattering of common sense. That's the real POINT.
>
> I think there's 2 people here who show enough jealousy over me

that you could line up on your side of the table:

Who could ever be jealous of a complete loser like Rob Singer. You
back down on your bets, you constantly lie about your own results,
your only defense is hurling the same impotent and boring insults
over and over again. You are the laughing stock of this forum and

all of Las Vegas. How sweet it is ...

A simple statement followed by non-stop ramble laced with word-
reaching....Is THAT what I've reduced you to here? Are you THAT
frustrated and discombobulated so as to have to rape yourself in
public like this??

> Of course you--who
> actually idolizes what I do and how I do it; and jimmy, who
obviously
> is another gaming loser who hates winners and hates it even more
when
> they talk about it. It's good to see them here and on the same
team!
> It's always a bonus to get to dismantle and humiliate two for the
> price of one!

Da plane, da plane.

> > > You radiate jealousy whenever anyone
> > > shows more articulation than you anywhere within that cursed
> > sickness
> > > and problem area of your life--video poker. And I think you'd
> learn
> > > more than another thing or two if you watched me play and
detect
> > > cycles--it'll just cost the nerd $35,000/session. Not a bad
price
> > for such a vp prowess-packing stud, now is it little dicky???
Think
> of all the moola you'd be gaining in 'the long-term'!!!
>
> > ROTFLMAO. What great timing. Only a con man would suggest
teaching
> > your ridiculous system for MONEY. Thanks, little man ... How
sweet
> it is ...
>
> Hmmmm....Ever wonder why everyone else gets trained for free??

Like

> the stripper said (that's a girl who dances with her clothes off)
if
> you've got it, flaunt it! I do....only YOU get to pay for it!!

Ho hum. Another day another retraction. Don't you get tired of
changing your story over and over again? You are the biggest loser

in all of Las Vegas. There's no place hide little man.

You mean 'Arizona' don't you..... Sorry to do that to you again, but
i know how it jabs away at that vp belly of yours!!!

···

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

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

> > > > > > You guys aren't gonna get anywhere with little dicky's
> slide
> > > rule
> > > > > > here. And he's right--it's a 'waste of time' because no
> > matter
> > > > how you cut it, when you apply long-term nonsense
(methodology)
> > to
> > > > short-term play, positive games will end up positive and
> negative
> > > > games negative. Every simulation will always follow that
> > guideline
> > > > >regardless, because it comes right out of the classroom.

And

> the
> > > > >reason I say the dicker won't be able to program ALL of my
> > special
> > > > > plays exactly when and where I use them is because Dean
> Zamzow
> > > told
> > > > > me HE couldn't. I gave dick the benefit of the doubt and
> > offerred
> > > > to sit with him and explain the entire procedure to him,

but

> he'd
> > > > rather sit idly by on the sidelines and continue to
feel 'safe'
> > > > because he knows there's validity to what I'm saying.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmmmm. When I ask Rob to explain how he detects "hot"
cycles
> he
> > > > > couldn't do it. So, I think we can pretty much ignore his
> > ability
> > > > to describe the "entire procedure" in any way, shape or

form.

> If
> > > this
> > > > > sounds like a typical con man response, ... Well, you

know

> the
> > > > > saying ... If it walks like duck ...
> > > >
> > > > You just don't like the fact that Dean Z. is identified
> ANYWHERE
> > as
> > > > having more ability, credibility, sense and capability than
> you,
> > > > don't you....too bad weasel.
> > >
> > > Dean Z. probably has "more ability, credibility, sense and
> > capability than" me. Your point?
> >
> > Yup, but the part that gets you the most is he's created
something
> > that people want, when all you can do is rumble thru the

internet

> > showing jealousy at anyone who's famous and/or knows how to

win.

>
> LMAO. Dean did a fantastic job with winpoker. It's a great tool

for

> the serious APer. I've used it countless hours to fine tune my
winnng play.

Typical weeny-response whenever a geek gets caught showing envy---
throw in some praise so as not to look the complete envious fool.

Too

late little dicky....

Another asserted lie that only makes Robbie look foolish. I've NEVER
been in the application programming business and would never even
try. To make such a ridiculous assertion points how how little Robbie
knows about the programming business. But, hey, who am I to stop him
from making a complete ass of himself. You gotta love it ...

>
> > You've been left in his dust...we can all see that. Get over it.
>
> Explain how having a great tool does anything but help me. You
really do love to say the most foolish things.

Gee, I didn't think I'd see this much jealousy from you over

another

math geek! HAHAHAHA!!!!

You gotta love it ...

>
> > > Pretty much anyone can see your entire procedure is a con and
> your
> > special elixir, er, plays are the hook ... PROOF of CON to

anyone

> > with a smattering of common sense. That's the real POINT.
> >
> > I think there's 2 people here who show enough jealousy over me
that you could line up on your side of the table:
>
> Who could ever be jealous of a complete loser like Rob Singer.

You

> back down on your bets, you constantly lie about your own

results,

> your only defense is hurling the same impotent and boring insults
> over and over again. You are the laughing stock of this forum and
all of Las Vegas. How sweet it is ...

A simple statement followed by non-stop ramble laced with word-
reaching....Is THAT what I've reduced you to here? Are you THAT
frustrated and discombobulated so as to have to rape yourself in
public like this??

LMAO. RIV at his best. Yes, RIV, that is a very good description of
Robbie's current state on this forum. Thanks for giving everyone this
insight into what Rob thinks of himself.

>
> > Of course you--who
> > actually idolizes what I do and how I do it; and jimmy, who
> obviously
> > is another gaming loser who hates winners and hates it even

more

> when
> > they talk about it. It's good to see them here and on the same
> team!
> > It's always a bonus to get to dismantle and humiliate two for

the

> > price of one!
>
> Da plane, da plane.

> > > > You radiate jealousy whenever anyone
> > > > shows more articulation than you anywhere within that

cursed

> > > sickness
> > > > and problem area of your life--video poker. And I think

you'd

> > learn
> > > > more than another thing or two if you watched me play and
> detect
> > > > cycles--it'll just cost the nerd $35,000/session. Not a bad
> price
> > > for such a vp prowess-packing stud, now is it little dicky???
> Think
> > of all the moola you'd be gaining in 'the long-term'!!!
> >
> > > ROTFLMAO. What great timing. Only a con man would suggest
> teaching
> > > your ridiculous system for MONEY. Thanks, little man ... How
> sweet
> > it is ...
> >
> > Hmmmm....Ever wonder why everyone else gets trained for free??
Like
> > the stripper said (that's a girl who dances with her clothes

off)

> if
> > you've got it, flaunt it! I do....only YOU get to pay for it!!
>
> Ho hum. Another day another retraction. Don't you get tired of
> changing your story over and over again? You are the biggest

loser

in all of Las Vegas. There's no place hide little man.

You mean 'Arizona' don't you.....

Well, both actually ... In fact, it goes along with you whereever you
go.

> > > > > You just don't like the fact that Dean Z. is identified
> > ANYWHERE
> > > as
> > > > > having more ability, credibility, sense and capability

than

> > you,
> > > > > don't you....too bad weasel.
> > > >
> > > > Dean Z. probably has "more ability, credibility, sense and
> > > capability than" me. Your point?
> > >
> > > Yup, but the part that gets you the most is he's created
> something
> > > that people want, when all you can do is rumble thru the
internet
> > > showing jealousy at anyone who's famous and/or knows how to
win.
> >
> > LMAO. Dean did a fantastic job with winpoker. It's a great tool
for
> > the serious APer. I've used it countless hours to fine tune my
> winnng play.
>
> Typical weeny-response whenever a geek gets caught showing envy---
> throw in some praise so as not to look the complete envious fool.
Too
> late little dicky....

Another asserted lie that only makes Robbie look foolish. I've

NEVER

been in the application programming business and would never even
try. To make such a ridiculous assertion points how how little

Robbie

knows about the programming business. But, hey, who am I to stop

him

from making a complete ass of himself. You gotta love it ...

BS--caught again! Remember that little 'application program' you put
together on that stupid OEJ game you play?? Sorry Charlie....NEXT!

> > > You've been left in his dust...we can all see that. Get over

it.

> >
> > Explain how having a great tool does anything but help me. You
> really do love to say the most foolish things.
>
> Gee, I didn't think I'd see this much jealousy from you over
another math geek! HAHAHAHA!!!!

You gotta love it ...

I DO! I DO!!!

> >
> > > > Pretty much anyone can see your entire procedure is a con

and

> > your
> > > special elixir, er, plays are the hook ... PROOF of CON to
anyone
> > > with a smattering of common sense. That's the real POINT.
> > >
> > > I think there's 2 people here who show enough jealousy over

me

> that you could line up on your side of the table:
> >
> > Who could ever be jealous of a complete loser like Rob Singer.
You
> > back down on your bets, you constantly lie about your own
results,
> > your only defense is hurling the same impotent and boring

insults

> > over and over again. You are the laughing stock of this forum

and

> all of Las Vegas. How sweet it is ...
>
> A simple statement followed by non-stop ramble laced with word-
> reaching....Is THAT what I've reduced you to here? Are you THAT
> frustrated and discombobulated so as to have to rape yourself in
> public like this??

LMAO. RIV at his best. Yes, RIV, that is a very good description of
Robbie's current state on this forum. Thanks for giving everyone

this insight into what Rob thinks of himself.

?? Why, I'm THE BOSS on this here forum!

> >
> > > Of course you--who
> > > actually idolizes what I do and how I do it; and jimmy, who
> > obviously
> > > is another gaming loser who hates winners and hates it even
more
> > when
> > > they talk about it. It's good to see them here and on the

same

> > team!
> > > It's always a bonus to get to dismantle and humiliate two for
the
> > > price of one!
> >
> > Da plane, da plane.
>
> > > > > You radiate jealousy whenever anyone
> > > > > shows more articulation than you anywhere within that
cursed
> > > > sickness
> > > > > and problem area of your life--video poker. And I think
you'd
> > > learn
> > > > > more than another thing or two if you watched me play and
> > detect
> > > > > cycles--it'll just cost the nerd $35,000/session. Not a

bad

> > price
> > > > for such a vp prowess-packing stud, now is it little

dicky???

> > Think
> > > of all the moola you'd be gaining in 'the long-term'!!!
> > >
> > > > ROTFLMAO. What great timing. Only a con man would suggest
> > teaching
> > > > your ridiculous system for MONEY. Thanks, little man ...

How

> > sweet
> > > it is ...
> > >
> > > Hmmmm....Ever wonder why everyone else gets trained for

free??

> Like
> > > the stripper said (that's a girl who dances with her clothes
off)
> > if
> > > you've got it, flaunt it! I do....only YOU get to pay for it!!
> >
> > Ho hum. Another day another retraction. Don't you get tired of
> > changing your story over and over again? You are the biggest
loser
> in all of Las Vegas. There's no place hide little man.
>
> You mean 'Arizona' don't you.....

Well, both actually ... In fact, it goes along with you whereever

you go.

And so do you! In fact, I'd almost be lost without the daily spanking
I deal you. I love the nerd-whacking i've been so very blessed with
being able to relive over again from years ago. God Bless YOU!!!

···

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