I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much as he was the exercise. Besides, everyone who plays a vp machine inside a casino is gambling, not all advantage players win, and not everyone else loses.
"gamblinman46825" wrote:
> This whole subject is drivel and serves little purpose in my opinion!
Dan Paymar replied:
This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue as to why he believes
that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I think the the vp moderator was right about his initial concerns with Rob Singer responses(3 and counting) to this subject being disruptive. I would respectfully suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any further participation on this thread so the rest of the group may enjoy this subject without controversy.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much as he was the exercise. Besides, everyone who plays a vp machine inside a casino is gambling, not all advantage players win, and not everyone else loses.
"gamblinman46825" wrote:
> > This whole subject is drivel and serves little purpose in my opinion!Dan Paymar replied:
> This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue as to why he believes
> that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
How about adding YOUR name to the list of disruptees?
CF
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance"
I think the the vp moderator was right about his initial concerns with Rob
Singer responses(3 and counting) to this subject being disruptive. I would
respectfully suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any further participation on
this thread so the rest of the group may enjoy this subject without controversy.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" <rob.singer1111@...>
wrote:
I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much as he was the exercise.
Besides, everyone who plays a vp machine inside a casino is gambling, not all
advantage players win, and not everyone else loses.
"gamblinman46825" wrote:
> > This whole subject is drivel and serves little purpose in my opinion!Dan Paymar replied:
> This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue as to why he believes
> that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1955/20228/V/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
NO! What exactly was inflammatory here? Some win. some lose. Either in spite of themselves or because of themselves. Get a grip. Looks like this might liven up a forum that has been devoid of much real information for awhile. You go Rob. You too Bob. Everybody jump in! for the rest - don't forget how that "delete" function works!
Jigger
"The closest I ever got to a 4.0 in school was my blood alcohol content."
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too
seriously."
From: jim_mason7 <7711-jimmason@usa.net>
I think the the vp moderator was right about his
initial concerns with Rob Singer responses(3 and
counting) to this subject being disruptive. I would
respectfully suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any
further participation on this thread so the rest of the
group may enjoy this subject without controversy.--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
"rob.singer1111@yahoo.com"
<rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
>
> I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much
as he was the exercise. Besides, everyone who plays a vp
machine inside a casino is gambling, not all advantage
players win, and not everyone else loses.
>
>
> "gamblinman46825" wrote:
> > > This whole subject is drivel and serves
little purpose in my opinion!
>
>
> Dan Paymar replied:
> > This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue
as to why he believes
> > that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1955/20228/V/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
vpFREE\-fullfeatured@yahoogroups\.com
Neither Mister Singer nor Mister Kneeland can be
construed as being off topic, rude or mean here.
I tend to disagree with a lot of Mister Singer's
positions about VP and agree with Frank most
of the time, I still enjoy and respect both of
them and their opinions.
Certainly, we can learn from our intellectual
'opponents' in an honest discussion.
I too have a delete key.
--- On Wed, 3/21/12, Jigger Woodruff <bayfieldkent@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Jigger Woodruff <bayfieldkent@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] rob singer posts
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, March 21, 2012, 10:20 AM
NO! What exactly was inflammatory here? Some win. some lose. Either in spite of themselves or because of themselves. Get a grip. Looks like this might liven up a forum that has been devoid of much real information for awhile. You go Rob. You too Bob. Everybody jump in! for the rest - don't forget how that "delete" function works!
Jigger
"The closest I ever got to a 4.0 in school was my blood alcohol content."
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too
seriously."
From: jim_mason7 <7711-jimmason@usa.net>
I think the the vp moderator was right about his
initial concerns with Rob Singer responses(3 and
counting) to this subject being disruptive. I would
respectfully suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any
further participation on this thread so the rest of the
group may enjoy this subject without controversy.--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
"rob.singer1111@yahoo.com"
<rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
>
> I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much
as he was the exercise. Besides, everyone who plays a vp
machine inside a casino is gambling, not all advantage
players win, and not everyone else loses.
>
>
> "gamblinman46825" wrote:
> > > This whole subject is drivel and serves
little purpose in my opinion!
>
>
> Dan Paymar replied:
> > This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue
as to why he believes
> > that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1955/20228/V/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
vpFREE\-fullfeatured@yahoogroups\.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I can only hope that your kidding about banning anyone. It is entirely understandable to ban someone should they become abusive, however, it becomes your choice to read or not to read Mr. Singer's posts. Last time I checked, we live in a country that not only accepts but often time encourages alternate opinions. Just because someone differs in your opinions, or dare I say, have a mind of their own and is not afraid to speak it is not a call to arms for banning. If you do not like Mr. Singers posts, then simply do not rad them, personally I find his insight and understanding of the game (remember it is a game) helpful.
________________________________
From: jim_mason7 <7711-jimmason@usa.net>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 9:37 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] rob singer posts
I think the the vp moderator was right about his initial concerns with Rob Singer responses(3 and counting) to this subject being disruptive. I would respectfully suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any further participation on this thread so the rest of the group may enjoy this subject without controversy.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much as he was the exercise. Besides, everyone who plays a vp machine inside a casino is gambling, not all advantage players win, and not everyone else loses.
"gamblinman46825" wrote:
> > This whole subject is drivel and serves little purpose in my opinion!Dan Paymar replied:
> This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue as to why he believes
> that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
For followup I thought I would post that I did call the IRS today and was put in touch with their e-file representative.
She told me that, yes, there is a limit of 30 W2G's that can be e-filed, more than that and you have to file a paper return.
Of course you can lump them into a sum depending on how you do your own return but apparently that's "illegal" and an accountant shouldn't be doing that for you.
She also seemed to be saying that each W2G should be listed separately, but she also said that had something to do with the program you are using so I'm not sure on that point at all.
Valerie
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6987 (20120321) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I'm all for freedom. But last time I
checked we live in a very conformist country that has things like the
Sedition Act and the Patriot Acts on the books as law. Now mine is
the kind of comment I'd expect to get pushed to the other forum.
Singer's. however controversial, does have to do with VP. But I'll
continue. . . Various free speech activist groups rank the good ole
USA anywhere from 24th to 36th in the world.
________________________________
From: "Albert J. Roth, Jr." <alrothjr@yahoo.com>
To: "vpFREE@yahoogroups.com" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] rob singer posts
I can only hope that your kidding about banning anyone. It is entirely understandable to ban someone should they become abusive, however, it becomes your choice to read or not to read Mr. Singer's posts. Last time I checked, we live in a country that not only accepts but often time encourages alternate opinions. Just because someone differs in your opinions, or dare I say, have a mind of their own and is not afraid to speak it is not a call to arms for banning. If you do not like Mr. Singers posts, then simply do not rad them, personally I find his insight and understanding of the game (remember it is a game) helpful.
________________________________
From: jim_mason7 <7711-jimmason@usa.net>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 9:37 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] rob singer posts
I think the the vp moderator was right about his initial concerns with Rob Singer responses(3 and counting) to this subject being disruptive. I would respectfully suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any further participation on this thread so the rest of the group may enjoy this subject without controversy.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much as he was the exercise. Besides, everyone who plays a vp machine inside a casino is gambling, not all advantage players win, and not everyone else loses.
"gamblinman46825" wrote:
> > This whole subject is drivel and serves little purpose in my opinion!Dan Paymar replied:
> This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue as to why he believes
> that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I haven't filed hard copies of my W2G's for years. Never a problem. Last year (tax year 2010), I has 70 of them. The total of the W2Gs is listed under miscellaneous income. My accountant e-files.
Don the Dentist
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Valerie Pollard" <vpollard@...> wrote:
For followup I thought I would post that I did call the IRS today and was put in touch with their e-file representative.
She told me that, yes, there is a limit of 30 W2G's that can be e-filed, more than that and you have to file a paper return.Of course you can lump them into a sum depending on how you do your own return but apparently that's "illegal" and an accountant shouldn't be doing that for you.
She also seemed to be saying that each W2G should be listed separately, but she also said that had something to do with the program you are using so I'm not sure on that point at all.Valerie
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6987 (20120321) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Don wrote,
" Never a problem. Last year (tax year 2010), I has 70 of them. The total of the W2Gs is listed under miscellaneous income. My accountant e-files".
But is it a matter that you've been lucky to not get caught?
So you just put it under miscellaneous income with no mention that it is "certain gambling winnings"?
Seems risky, that is unless one doesn't mind tangling with the irs and having to explain everything to them. I'm glad it's worked for you but I don't know if I could stand to do it.
V
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6987 (20120321) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
<<Don wrote,
" Never a problem. Last year (tax year 2010), I has 70 of them. The total of
the W2Gs is listed under miscellaneous income. My accountant e-files".
But is it a matter that you've been lucky to not get caught?
So you just put it under miscellaneous income with no mention that it is
"certain gambling winnings"?
Seems risky, that is unless one doesn't mind tangling with the irs and
having to explain everything to them. I'm glad it's worked for you but I
don't know if I could stand to do it.>>
My best guess is that your accountant is simply repeating what his tax
software is telling him. A couple years ago I looked at the actual content
being e-filed and there was no data corresponding to individual W-2G amounts
or other information on those forms. Now it may have changed the last year
or two, but in the past all I've heard from other high-limit gamblers is
that as long as the amount on line 21 is greater than or equal to the total
of the W-2Gs the IRS won't question it. If it's less, you will likely get a
letter audit. My point is that while the tax software asks you to type in
all that data for each W-2G, it doesn't actually use it other than to total
the amounts as far as I can tell.
Cogno
I can take the heat for my opinion-Never suggested banning rob singer.
I just reiterated VP Free Moderater's original concern of disruption by rob singer.
I do not appreciate the personal attack by card father for my opinion.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, John White <depbonus@...> wrote:
I'm all for freedom. But last time I
checked we live in a very conformist country that has things like the
Sedition Act and the Patriot Acts on the books as law. Now mine is
the kind of comment I'd expect to get pushed to the other forum.
Singer's. however controversial, does have to do with VP. But I'll
continue. . . Various free speech activist groups rank the good ole
USA anywhere from 24th to 36th in the world.________________________________
From: "Albert J. Roth, Jr." <alrothjr@...>
To: "vpFREE@yahoogroups.com" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] rob singer postsÂ
I can only hope that your kidding about banning anyone. It is entirely understandable to ban someone should they become abusive, however, it becomes your choice to read or not to read Mr. Singer's posts. Last time I checked, we live in a country that not only accepts but often time encourages alternate opinions. Just because someone differs in your opinions, or dare I say, have a mind of their own and is not afraid to speak it is not a call to arms for banning. If you do not like Mr. Singers posts, then simply do not rad them, personally I find his insight and understanding of the game (remember it is a game) helpful.Â________________________________
From: jim_mason7 <7711-jimmason@...>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 9:37 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] rob singer postsÂ
I think the the vp moderator was right about his initial concerns with Rob Singer responses(3 and counting) to this subject being disruptive. I would respectfully suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any further participation on this thread so the rest of the group may enjoy this subject without controversy.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@..." <rob.singer1111@> wrote:
>
> I don't think gamblinman was dissing the math as much as he was the exercise. Besides, everyone who plays a vp machine inside a casino is gambling, not all advantage players win, and not everyone else loses.
>
>
> "gamblinman46825" wrote:
> > > This whole subject is drivel and serves little purpose in my opinion!
>
>
> Dan Paymar replied:
> > This fellow's handle "gamblinman" gives us a clue as to why he believes
> > that the math is "drivel." He's a gambler ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Never said there was no mention that it was gambling winnings. It was identified as such.
My point was that one does not need to file hard copies of the W2Gs (assuming there were no witholdings), and one could e-file with more than "x" amount of W2Gs.
Don the Dentist
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Valerie Pollard" <vpollard@...> wrote:
So you just put it under miscellaneous income with no mention that it is "certain gambling winnings"?
Don wrote,
"Never said there was no mention that it was gambling winnings. It was identified as such. My point was that one does not need to file hard copies of the W2Gs (assuming there were no witholdings), and one could e-file with more than "x" amount of W2Gs."
Oh - thanks Don. I thought you were saying you put it as a total just as "miscellaneous"....
And I do know that you don't have to file the hard copies of the W2G's....
However I have to say again that the IRS themselves told me yesterday that for some reason now there is a limit of 30 W2G's to e-file.
I'm really tempted to put the total under miscellaneous as you do.
Valerie
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6989 (20120322) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
<<However I have to say again that the IRS themselves told me yesterday that
for some reason now there is a limit of 30 W2G's to e-file.
I'm really tempted to put the total under miscellaneous as you do.>>
The IRS help line is notorious for giving out misinformation.
You will put the total under line 21, "other income," regardless of whether
you e-file, paper file, use tax software, use an accountant, or do your
taxes by hand. That's the only possible place to put them. The only question
is whether you believe the tax software when it tells you you can't e-file
with more than 30 W-2Gs.
Cogno
We don’t e-file but the way we handle our W-2G’s is to put the one big total in the proper place on the main return (that depends on whether you file as a recreational gambler or file a Schedule C as a professional one) and then attach a list to the return. We used to list each W-2G on that attachment, but now we combine all the W-2G’s from one casino. So then our list is by casino totals.
However, you can never be sure what is the best way. The IRS has a way of losing attachments. We have had them question us (in a letter audit) and we had to send the list a second time.
------------------------------------------
Jean $¢ott, Frugal Gambler
http://queenofcomps.com/
You can read my blog at
http://jscott.lvablog.com/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Although the "limit of 30" wasn't involved, we kicked this issue around not too long ago. At that time at least a few of us suggested including one (and only one) aggregate W2G per casino when e-filing. I still think that's the way to go.
Furthermore, I question the need for attaching/including individual W2G's when withholding is involved. Simply summarize the withholding from however many W2G's you've combined. I'm fairly certain underreporting of withholding is NOT one of the IRS's bigger concerns.
Pat Roach
Jim,
On Tuesday, March 20th, 2012 at 9:37pm, you wrote, "I would respectfully
suggest that Mr Singer be barred from any further participation on this
thread...."
If Card Father suggesting your name be added to the list of disrupters is a
personal attack, then your suggesting Rob Singer be barred (from any
further participation on the thread) is also a personal attack.
Nevertheless, there's really no need to suggest barring or banning anyone
from anything. The moderator has said repeatedly that we are to leave the
moderating to him.
Luke
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:55 PM, jim_mason7 <7711-jimmason@usa.net> wrote:
I can take the heat for my opinion-Never suggested banning rob singer.
I just reiterated VP Free Moderater's original concern of disruption by
rob singer.
I do not appreciate the personal attack by card father for my opinion.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
You usually have to put a "date won" next to the casino entries. As a non-pro, for example, I'd be nervous listing one $100,000 win dated December 31 ( assuming your last jackpot was then ) , versus 20 $5000 hits scattered about during the year. The logic being, for audit profiling , maybe he's a person that hit a big jackpot in late December , got lucky, and is likely a winner for the year. Are you saying it dont matter, they pull up their records , see that its really 20 hits not one ?
best...Tom
----- Original Message ----- From: "Queen of Comps" <queenofcomps@cox.net>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: W2G
We don’t e-file but the way we handle our W-2G’s is to put the one big total in the proper place on the main return (that depends on whether you file as a recreational gambler or file a Schedule C as a professional one) and then attach a list to the return. We used to list each W-2G on that attachment, but now we combine all the W-2G’s from one casino. So then our list is by casino totals.
However, you can never be sure what is the best way. The IRS has a way of losing attachments. We have had them question us (in a letter audit) and we had to send the list a second time.
<<You usually have to put a "date won" next to the casino entries. As a non-pro, for example, I'd be nervous listing one $100,000 win dated December
31 ( assuming your last jackpot was then ) , versus 20 $5000 hits scattered about during the year. The logic being, for audit profiling , maybe he's a person that hit a big jackpot in late December , got lucky, and is likely a winner for the year. Are you saying it dont matter, they pull up their records , see that its really 20 hits not one ?
best...Tom>>
1) They have copies of all your W-2Gs already.
2) Although tax software asks you to fill in a bunch of information about each W-2G, when I checked the actual data being transmitted via the e-file a few years ago I didn't see any of the individual W-2G data, just the total amount won.
3) If you file a paper return there is no place to list individual W-2Gs, nor are you supposed to return them unless there is tax withheld
So my conclusion is that tax software unnecessarily asks you to do a lot of typing.
Cogno