Las Vegas GF Chat Room

Another game/another win. Ho-hum.

Mac Jones reminds me of a faggot. Glad he got humiliatingly removed for a real QB--Bailey Zappe.

 

Congratulations, Rob. According to redeitz's numbers you are now 22-20 in units wagers (counting your bolded best bet as 2 units). This means 22 wagers won @ $100 for +$2200. And 20 wagers lost @ $110 for -$2200 for a grand total of $00.00

You have managed to break even so far. Of course that is not counting your $100 parlay each week (very degenerate gambling). If we count that you are -$700.

We are all very impressed.

 

I dont' know exactly what my total wager is per day but it is definitely in 4 figures, sometimes 5 figures, per day. So the "Mickey Crimm won't risk a buck" is bullshit as usual.

I'm having a blast watching Rob demolish you and KJ on a daily basis. It's some very funny stuff. Rob is having fun while you two idiots blabber on with morose bullshit. You two fish take the bait every time. LOL! A couple of KING GUPPIES.

 

Crimm, I have never cared about these weird pissing contest, type trolling contests on these forums that you now seem obsessed with. All I care about is calling out people like Singer, who repeatedly, I mean for years, repeatedly mislead players and members with their BS claims. For over a decade YOU also called out Singer and these complete BS claims, until you made some sort of weird pack to no longer do so and support his BS.

That is on you. You can support whoever you like. But it is not me who is the bad guy, doing EXACTLY what you did for over a decade.

I am an AP, playing by the math. And I'll be damned if I will allow this nut job, or others like him, to claim BS nonsense like they win via voodoo concepts like Stop limits, progression wagering (which can't overcome negative expectation, special, less optimal plays, and machines telepathing hot and cold cycles to him. I am embarrassed for you that you now support him and his 20 year troll of the AP community.

The guy is a failed AP! and he is damn bitter about it. It is insulting to every real AP, yourself included, the BS that he still pushes.

 

You may be enjoying someone lying about what they accomplished gambling and lying about what is possible gambling. By possible I mean has at some point in history been accomplished by someone. I don't find these kinds of claims funny. I don't find them amusing. I've been debunking them for 40 years and will continue to do so. Rob's claims are one step more believable than the pages of ads in the opening Friday editions of USA Today when it first started publishing, with people claiming to have won 80 and 85% versus the spread.

My suspicion, and I think anyone who reads your post is going to have the same suspicion, is that your post says more about you than it says about anyone else.

The difference between APs claiming to have done this or that and allegedly supporting themselves is that your claims exist in some largely unverifiable and quite possibly fictional narrative space. Winning or losing sports betting, however, is black and white. You have the record or you don't.

I appreciate you pointing out that lying in public space about gambling accomplishments and what's possible is something that you find amusing. Believe me, I'll be quoting your post above to many people for a long time.

 

Hey, you got me pegged. I don't make a dime gambling. As a matter of fact I lost everything gambling. I now live under the bridge down by the river and and use the computer at the library to post in the gambling forums. Just a very long losing streak don't ya see.

But my luck is due to turn around. I'm working on a system for the Big Six Wheel. I got to wait on my food stamps for next month then sell them to get the money to test out the system which I'm sure is a guaranteed winner. I'm already writing a book about it "How To Reap Untold Riches On The Big Six Wheel." Pretty catchy title, eh? I'm gonna take the money I win on the Wheel and use it to publish the book.

Hey, redietz. Do me a favor. When you contact Gambling With An Edge could you plug the book for me? Tell them I'm available for an interview. I'll give them a thorough run down of my system. It's secret right now but you have to know when to bet the even numbers and the odd numbers. I'm good at that kind of guesswork. I can see the patterns.

Anyways, thank you in advance for plugging the book.

 

Kew, do you ever realize what a fool you make of yourself when you stumble thru badmouthing others?

Mickey doesn't endorse--or even agree that my Singer Play Strategy that I used for 4+ years, is a winning strategy. I did happen to win over $350k using it, but because it relies on getting lucky at higher denominations, I'm pretty certain that I wasn't "beating what the math says".

Critics claim I lost because of my playing mostly -EV games, and say that if I had instead played all +EV games I very probably would have won. So 1% means HOW MUCH? You see how stupid that is? I won because I got continuously lucky playing multi-denominational progressions and regressions, special plays etc. using a large bankroll shooting for a comparatively small 5% profit. An 80-85% win rate was not hard to attain. I could have busted out also but I didn't. The math won't show me winning after a high amount of sessions. But I played once a week. I was lucky, and that was my goal every time I played.

I also did in fact fail at VP APing prior to using the SPS.. Why? Try to follow this when you clear all that LV clutter out of your unproductive mind. I was living and CONSTANTLY travelling around the world helping develop and sell ATC Systems wherever the was either military or commercial airports. And guess how many of those there are....So when I had the infrequent chances to get to our US home, I always tried to fit Nevada trips in to AP the machines. My focus was bad and I was always rushed. I planned poorly and didn't do so well.

 

This week:

Mia -3.5 over Det
Minn -3.5 over Az
Tenn -2 over Hou
Indy -3 over REDSKINS
NO +1.5 over LV

There's no way to bet either the GB or TB games. Will Rodgers and Brady motivate their teams to snap out of their funks? No way to get a real feel.

 

Do you know how stupid this sounds (because it is). The great Singer strategy is "I win because I am lucky". You sound like every other losing degenerate gambler....and for good reason because THAT is what you are.

The topper is your stupid 1% comment. 1% is huge. 1% disadvantage and a player will eventually lose all his money. 1% advantage and you are a long-term winner. I know because I have played blackjack for 19 years now at slightly less than 1% advantage and made a million and a half dollars doing so.

Look for the longest time, decades, a 1% advantage was what the casinos had on many game. 1/2 percent even on full pay VP and less than 1/2 percent on the original rules blackjack. And they cleaned up for decades. It is just now they have gotten greedy and insist on 3, 4, 5 percent or more on many games (and side bets). But 1% advantage a player or the house can do just fine.

In all seriousness Rob, that you think there is very little difference between a 1% advantage and 1% disadvantage (or house edge) says all anyone need know about you.

You are a math denier, hoping to get lucky. That is what all degenerate gamblers are. The casinos were built on players like you.

 

Exactly the low IQ and illiterate response I expected and which you couldn't wait to expose yourself with.

This 1% "advantage" is really irrelevant when talking about how little I played compared to casino lifetimes and the phony career results and timeline you keep concocting about yourself--which you only do by the way to feel better about your failed, loser self.

You are such an idiot when it comes to understanding gambling and how the math works over time. One might say you're a dropout? And what else could one expect from someone who's had no productivity, lives the lowlife of a sick queer, and has to make up everything online on the go because his life is such an outright failure? Face it kew--not only are you a nothing burger---your entire family is.

And that's the name of that tune....

 

Well, ONE of us sure doesn't understand how the math work, Mr I got lucky or I need to get lucky.

The rest of your post is just more very typical Rob Singer projecting and bitterness. The facts are that in my late 30's I am a successful advantage player that has supported myself from advantage play (mostly blackjack) for 19 years now, while YOU failed miserably as an advantage player (admittedly so), and started making up all these stupid, math defying stories.

That you now KNOW there are so many players that have succeeded where you failed miserably is the living hell that you now live in. All you have left and have had left for quite some time is to call people names like a 6 year old. Enjoy you living hell, you nasty old fuck.

 

It is as simple as this: If winning was not about finding and playing with an advantage, even a slim 1% advantage and instead, was all about playing negative expectation games and just getting lucky, then Alan Mendelson, would be a winning player. Every degenerate losing type play thinks they are going to "get lucky". That is what the casinos bank on. That is what pays for those large casinos on the strip. Rob Singer, is now just repeating the same old degenerate gambler mentality.

Now where is Mickey Crimm? It is funny how mickey goes radio silent when Rob says these stupid things. So I will ask mickey flat out, is that how it works mickey? It isn't about finding and identifying some advantage and then putting in the play at that advantage? Long-term winning is play is just about getting lucky?

 

Will you quit with the "mickey has disappeared" bullshit. I don't sit by my computer all day waiting for you guys to post. It's fall foliage season in case you don't know. I spend a lot of time cruising the scenic byways this time of year.

Now, when Rob and I were trolling each other there were some things I intentionally never mentioned about his strategy because it would validate some of what he does and give him ammunition against me. Here's some facts:

1. Rob played games that were over 99% like Triple Double Bonus Poker, a 99.6% game.
2. They were very high variance games
3. And he used a progressive system while playing which added greatly to the variance.

If a thousand players play 200,000 hands each of Triple Double Bonus while flat betting most will lose but there WILL BE some winners.

If those same 1K players play 200K hands while using Rob's progressive system it will significantly increase the number of winners.

So Rob's claims are really not out of hand. And you can tell everyone at GWAE I said so.

 

Uh-Oh....the John "kew" Fetterman of gambling forums isn't sweet on common sense posts.

Aside from that, I have some sage advice for tonight's game. Tampa Bay is struggling BIG TIME. They also report to have 8 starters out of 22 out tonight. But somehow, they are favored by 2 points right now. Maybe the oddsmakers think like I do about those black jackrabbit QB's?

As such, I just put $100 on the Ravens tonight, in a bet that's outside of the Singer Five. Of course, TB has Tom Brady and I will be rooting for them to win. But I don't expect they will. Evans and Godwin are still not at 100%, and that's the best they can field. But they have Tom Brady--a guy who's spent his career pissing in the faces of doubters and critics, and who is the GOAT of the sport.

Naturally, if you're kew you don't have a hundred bucks to risk tonight. You spent most of mommy's allowance on Burger King today.

 

You know, I'm almost feeling bad for Dan and his pitiful VCT. I just took a look, and it appears the hangers-on are posting infrequent nothing burgers out of boredom from being stuck at home with no money.

Isn't that a shame....

 

Gee....3-0 so far this weekend (or is it 4-0 after Thursday? ) And by the way kew, in what universe does betting 700 bucks a week make a person a "degenerate gambler" after said person recently pocketed over a million and a half dollars? If some random "LV AP" mugged a casino to that tune, they'd be putting $10k or more on all these games, citing "it's not if I win or lose--its whether or not it's a good bet commensurate with one's bankroll!"

That's the definition of a degenerate.

Wise up.

 

This is, again, really sad. I have to root for you to go 5-0 and win your parlay. Well, all I can say is good handicapping and good luck as this Colts game closes out.

 

Damn those Colts. That may have cost me a lot more than a $100 parlay. Damnit!!

 

That was brutal. Went 5-1 ATS in the YouWager NFL Contest this week. What an awful final game.

 

Better luck next week. But I'm happy at 4-1. Again.

Improbable outcome in Indy. Way out there really.