Gold Exclusive
My Favorites
I'm not sure why today became sarcasm day around here but I don't even know what to wear to such an occasion.
Something with lots of pockets to keep all those special plays handy. Maybe a green leisure suit to match all those greenbacks you will be taking home.
New Car--Video Poker Related
-
shadowman
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3587
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 5:42 pm
-
babybubba
- Senior Member
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:18 pm
[QUOTE=babybubba]
I only accept a challenge to produce documented proof to those willing to bet if it's there or not.
You will NEVER see any proof from Rob. He doesn't have any and he never will. Rob has already been taken up on one of these "bet" challenges ... what happened? ... Well, if you've been reading other threads on this forum you already know ... Rob backed down.
So, why is he now challenging another person? A rather poor attempt to hide behind bravado. Rob, it's too late. You left the barn door open with Fezzik. You need another escape hatch.
[/QUOTE]
Then let's see if you can back up those words! I will provide absolute evidence that I've won nearly $800,000 in my professional career directly to webman for his review, and his decision will be final. I will put up (and I'll make this less than what I challenged Fezzik with--$740,000 & $800,000 & eventually I dropped it to $250,000 that he backed out of): Let's do $100,000. We'll escrow it with webman and I'll have the legal paperwork drawn up starting the moment I get the OK from you and he--along with authority to use everyone's real name. In fact, I will provide all W2G's talked about in this week's Gaming Today article as well as my session-ending $50k winner a few weeks ago (it just arrived in the mail yesterday) at Caesar's for a bet of $100,000 more.
Hiding behind bravado?
I only accept a challenge to produce documented proof to those willing to bet if it's there or not.
You will NEVER see any proof from Rob. He doesn't have any and he never will. Rob has already been taken up on one of these "bet" challenges ... what happened? ... Well, if you've been reading other threads on this forum you already know ... Rob backed down.
So, why is he now challenging another person? A rather poor attempt to hide behind bravado. Rob, it's too late. You left the barn door open with Fezzik. You need another escape hatch.
[/QUOTE]
Then let's see if you can back up those words! I will provide absolute evidence that I've won nearly $800,000 in my professional career directly to webman for his review, and his decision will be final. I will put up (and I'll make this less than what I challenged Fezzik with--$740,000 & $800,000 & eventually I dropped it to $250,000 that he backed out of): Let's do $100,000. We'll escrow it with webman and I'll have the legal paperwork drawn up starting the moment I get the OK from you and he--along with authority to use everyone's real name. In fact, I will provide all W2G's talked about in this week's Gaming Today article as well as my session-ending $50k winner a few weeks ago (it just arrived in the mail yesterday) at Caesar's for a bet of $100,000 more.
Hiding behind bravado?
-
shadowman
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3587
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 5:42 pm
In fact, I will provide all W2G's talked about in this week's Gaming Today article as well as my session-ending $50k winner a few weeks ago (it just arrived in the mail yesterday) at Caesar's for a bet of $100,000 more.
Hiding behind bravado?
Let's see it. Anything other then full disclosure is simply hiding behind bravado as I just stated. It was nice of you to prove me right so quickly. Now, I'm heading out to the golf course for some 700 yard drives and another sub-60 round ...
-
MikeA
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:50 pm
I do have a question BB. In another thread we talked about the IRS and claiming loses up to the amount of wins to offset the tax liability. I hope you have not had enough in loses in obtaining those wins to offset all of that IRS liability (and your profits.) If I understand how it all works, you only get W2G's with wins and loses are not considered.
-
babybubba
- Senior Member
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:18 pm
[QUOTE=babybubba]
In fact, I will provide all W2G's talked about in this week's Gaming Today article as well as my session-ending $50k winner a few weeks ago (it just arrived in the mail yesterday) at Caesar's for a bet of $100,000 more.
Hiding behind bravado?
Let's see it. Anything other then full disclosure is simply hiding behind bravado as I just stated. I was nice of you prove me right so quickly. Now, I'm heading out to the golf course for some 700 yard drives and another sub-60 round ... [/QUOTE]
Does "let's see it" mean you're not going to cower this time or you want to make the bet?? Oh, I know you'll do anything not to answer clearly so you can pretend you're not stepping into the hole you dug for yourself, but i'm here to expose that kind of stuff about you. Step uyp to the plate and have some dignity.
In fact, I will provide all W2G's talked about in this week's Gaming Today article as well as my session-ending $50k winner a few weeks ago (it just arrived in the mail yesterday) at Caesar's for a bet of $100,000 more.
Hiding behind bravado?
Let's see it. Anything other then full disclosure is simply hiding behind bravado as I just stated. I was nice of you prove me right so quickly. Now, I'm heading out to the golf course for some 700 yard drives and another sub-60 round ... [/QUOTE]
Does "let's see it" mean you're not going to cower this time or you want to make the bet?? Oh, I know you'll do anything not to answer clearly so you can pretend you're not stepping into the hole you dug for yourself, but i'm here to expose that kind of stuff about you. Step uyp to the plate and have some dignity.
-
babybubba
- Senior Member
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:18 pm
I do have a question BB. In another thread we talked about the IRS and claiming loses up to the amount of wins to offset the tax liability. I hope you have not had enough in loses in obtaining those wins to offset all of that IRS liability (and your profits.) If I understand how it all works, you only get W2G's with wins and loses are not considered.
I've filed as a professional gambler since 1999. A lot of profits every year but also many expenses such as travel and I always use a rental car except at certain times like MAY 28th WHEN I"M TAKING THE Z06 UP TO LAKE TAHOE & SF FOR VACATION. Did you get that "0ej"?
I've filed as a professional gambler since 1999. A lot of profits every year but also many expenses such as travel and I always use a rental car except at certain times like MAY 28th WHEN I"M TAKING THE Z06 UP TO LAKE TAHOE & SF FOR VACATION. Did you get that "0ej"?
-
MikeA
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:50 pm
I've filed as a professional gambler since 1999. A lot of profits every year but also many expenses such as travel and I always use a rental car except at certain times like MAY 28th WHEN I"M TAKING THE Z06 UP TO LAKE TAHOE & SF FOR VACATION. Did you get that "0ej"?
I understand what you are saying about "expenses" but that wasn't really what I was trying to devine. Do you never have a losing VP session? A session where you quit before you have enough in credits to exceed that which you have invested in the session?
If I understand the basics of your methods, you start out at a low denomination, buyin for x coins and play until you win 40% of your session buyin. If you lose the session, you increase the denomination and buy in for x coins and again play until you win 40% of your session buyin. If you lose that, then you once again increase the denomination.
That sounds a lot like a negative progression and a negative progression requires that at some point, you have a win that exceeds everything that has been wagered in previous sessions at the lower denominations plus whatever you've won at the 40% profit on the current denomination. Whatever the case, it demands an ultimate win each time you play.
Do I have the basics correct? If so, then I again have to ask, have you never had a series of sessions in which you have not won? How often has it been your experience that this has occured and at what denomination did you "give up?"
-
babybubba
- Senior Member
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:18 pm
[QUOTE=babybubba]
I've filed as a professional gambler since 1999. A lot of profits every year but also many expenses such as travel and I always use a rental car except at certain times like MAY 28th WHEN I"M TAKING THE Z06 UP TO LAKE TAHOE & SF FOR VACATION. Did you get that "0ej"?
Do you never have a losing VP session? A session where you quit before you have enough in credits to exceed that which you have invested in the session?
If I understand the basics of your methods, you start out at a low denomination, buyin for x coins and play until you win 40% of your session buyin. If you lose the session, you increase the denomination and buy in for x coins and again play until you win 40% of your session buyin. If you lose that, then you once again increase the denomination.
That sounds a lot like a negative progression and a negative progression requires that at some point, you have a win that exceeds everything that has been wagered in previous sessions at the lower denominations plus whatever you've won at the 40% profit on the current denomination. Whatever the case, it demands an ultimate win each time you play.
Do I have the basics correct? If so, then I again have to ask, have you never had a series of sessions in which you have not won? How often has it been your experience that this has occured and at what denomination did you "give up?"
[/QUOTE]
Yes there are sessions where I lose, i.e., quit before I have enough credits that exceed what I invested in that session. But I don't see where you got the 40% figure from. I cash out whenever I get at least 40 credits ahead in the denomination I'm playing. That could be 40 or it could be 2000 or anywhere. I've never lost more than 2 session in a row and it's happened 2 or 3 times. There's rwally no "give up" denomination because I play either to the $25 machine or the $100 machine as pre-planned before going to the casino, and if I lose then I lose and go home. Yes, i have lost once at the $100 machine and it was almost $34,000 that day. Oddly enough, that was also at Caesar's several years ago.
I've filed as a professional gambler since 1999. A lot of profits every year but also many expenses such as travel and I always use a rental car except at certain times like MAY 28th WHEN I"M TAKING THE Z06 UP TO LAKE TAHOE & SF FOR VACATION. Did you get that "0ej"?
Do you never have a losing VP session? A session where you quit before you have enough in credits to exceed that which you have invested in the session?
If I understand the basics of your methods, you start out at a low denomination, buyin for x coins and play until you win 40% of your session buyin. If you lose the session, you increase the denomination and buy in for x coins and again play until you win 40% of your session buyin. If you lose that, then you once again increase the denomination.
That sounds a lot like a negative progression and a negative progression requires that at some point, you have a win that exceeds everything that has been wagered in previous sessions at the lower denominations plus whatever you've won at the 40% profit on the current denomination. Whatever the case, it demands an ultimate win each time you play.
Do I have the basics correct? If so, then I again have to ask, have you never had a series of sessions in which you have not won? How often has it been your experience that this has occured and at what denomination did you "give up?"
[/QUOTE]
Yes there are sessions where I lose, i.e., quit before I have enough credits that exceed what I invested in that session. But I don't see where you got the 40% figure from. I cash out whenever I get at least 40 credits ahead in the denomination I'm playing. That could be 40 or it could be 2000 or anywhere. I've never lost more than 2 session in a row and it's happened 2 or 3 times. There's rwally no "give up" denomination because I play either to the $25 machine or the $100 machine as pre-planned before going to the casino, and if I lose then I lose and go home. Yes, i have lost once at the $100 machine and it was almost $34,000 that day. Oddly enough, that was also at Caesar's several years ago.
-
MikeA
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:50 pm
I guess I presumed 100-coin starts which would make it 40%. Or maybe I misread your "40" for a percentage. I do appreciate your response. I just couldn't believe it possible that you would never have a losing run of sessions.
I'll have to go to my simulator and hack away at it for a while. Personally, based on the number of losing sessions I've had consecutively, it wouldn't have made any difference what denomination I had escalated to other than the minor point that I've lost my entire retirement several times over had I played the negative progression in denominations.
I'll have to go to my simulator and hack away at it for a while. Personally, based on the number of losing sessions I've had consecutively, it wouldn't have made any difference what denomination I had escalated to other than the minor point that I've lost my entire retirement several times over had I played the negative progression in denominations.
-
babybubba
- Senior Member
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:18 pm
I guess I presumed 100-coin starts which would make it 40%. Or maybe I misread your "40" for a percentage. I do appreciate your response. I just couldn't believe it possible that you would never have a losing run of sessions.
I'll have to go to my simulator and hack away at it for a while. Personally, based on the number of losing sessions I've had consecutively, it wouldn't have made any difference what denomination I had escalated to other than the minor point that I've lost my entire retirement several times over had I played the negative progression in denominations.
Just another reason why you, shadow and anyone else would need all the facts behind the strategy before either simulating it correctly or playing it properly to win as consistently as I do.
I'll have to go to my simulator and hack away at it for a while. Personally, based on the number of losing sessions I've had consecutively, it wouldn't have made any difference what denomination I had escalated to other than the minor point that I've lost my entire retirement several times over had I played the negative progression in denominations.
Just another reason why you, shadow and anyone else would need all the facts behind the strategy before either simulating it correctly or playing it properly to win as consistently as I do.
