Video Poker "Manipulation"

[Tedlark]

DaBurglar why is it that when other people post you call their work: idiotic; illogical; and, pointless, while your posts (in your own opinion) are: intelligent and logical?

The 2nd Amendment is for the right of regular citizens to keep and bear arms and a "well armed militia" are those same regular citizens acting as "occasional soldiers." The 2nd Amendment is not for the professional military of the United States and the defense of our country and interests.

Big government is different from Bloated government. We can have a big and powerful military and emergency response agency and a less bloated government at the same time.

[notes1]

DaBurglar why is it that when other people post you call their work: idiotic; illogical; and, pointless, while your posts (in your own opinion) are: intelligent and logical?

The 2nd Amendment is for the right of regular citizens to keep and bear arms and a "well armed militia" are those same regular citizens acting as "occasional soldiers." The 2nd Amendment is not for the professional military of the United States and the defense of our country and interests.

Big government is different from Bloated government. We can have a big and powerful military and emergency response agency and a less bloated government at the same time.
 excellent post.  only he is qualified to understand the complexities of most problems. reminds me of the guy in the white house. i guess that makes me a racist.    

[DaBurglar]

[QUOTE=Tedlark] DaBurglar why is it that when other people post you call their work: idiotic; illogical; and, pointless, while your posts (in your own opinion) are: intelligent and logical?

The 2nd Amendment is for the right of regular citizens to keep and bear arms and a "well armed militia" are those same regular citizens acting as "occasional soldiers." The 2nd Amendment is not for the professional military of the United States and the defense of our country and interests.

Big government is different from Bloated government. We can have a big and powerful military and emergency response agency and a less bloated government at the same time.
 excellent post.  only he is qualified to understand the complexities of most problems. reminds me of the guy in the white house. i guess that makes me a racist.    [/QUOTE]if the shoe fits......I guess it does.

[notes1]

it is easy to anticipate the reactions of those who lack common sense and are serially offended.

[olds442jetaway]

I can vouch for the " bunching " of premium hands which seems to be happening all over since 2011. My particular sample is about 5 million hands since the beginning of 2011 all at one casino. My most recent example is taken from a couple of my posts. W-2G Royals 2 days apart in back to back sessions and none the rest of 2015. Also, close to 10 dealt Wild Royals in one session on Double Down Stud and many sessions on the same game produce none. I have found similar situations with draw poker when hitting quad deuces throughout the year. I also still notice when people start hitting premium hands, many others start hitting them in the same area of the casino. Then there are the terrible long dry spells when nobody is hitting anything. This accomplishes two things for the casino. The player runs both out of time to play and usually money to play with too. Edited to state that this post was actually meant as a reply to Fla Phil's post where the subject was pay tables. I guess it fits here just as well.

[DaBurglar]

it is easy to anticipate the reactions of those who lack common sense and are serially offended.simple question that everyone can ask themselves, do you feel safer today, than you felt seven years ago?
**raspberry** to the first part.....those lacking common sense and serially (and easily) offended would include YOU most of all.As to the simplistic second comment, about asking do you feel "SAFER" today than seven years ago.....what the f....hell.... do you mean exactly, and why?   I'm serious, you really need to expound, expand and explain just what you are saying here for this "question" to even begin to be answered.....My own answer is NO obviously, i do not feel safer, but truthfully, since my teen years in the mid 1980s I can honestly say every year I have seen and perceived MORE apparent threats and dangers in the world, and yet the VAST majority of them are right in my own neighborhood or within the USA itself.....not overseas.ISIS/ISIL  is NOT the fault of Obama, as people like you crave to say.....it is TOTALLY the fault of the IRAQI Army and its feckless, corrupt and screwball prime minister AL Maliki.  It is absurd to blame everything on this president, and let me state categorically I DO NOT LIKE OBAMA nor did I vote for him nor do I think he is even an AVERAGE president at this point.....but I will NOT engage in this stupid, pointless and WRONG/INCORRECT blame game that the republicans (like you) insist on playing, while offering NOTHING in return as an alternative.Invading Iraq in 2003 was one of the most colossal and costly (and STUPID) moves any  president/administration has made in the history of the USA, let alone the history of the world.     While I do not subscribe to Obama's foreign policy (or lack of one) in general, I do emphatically agree with him in his reluctance to get involved in any further sustained ground wars in the middle east, and in his leaving Iraq in 2011.When the USA left Iraq in 2011 (a move which was a long time coming and which was clearly communicated before during and after the 2008 election, the strategy was that the IRAQI army under the current IRAQI Prime Minister (MR Al Maliki)  was supposed to oversee the prosecution and destruction of all insurgent groups.    The USA had/has spent over 30 BILLION dollars between 2006 and 2011 training, equipping and supporting the Iraqi Army and its prime Minister AL Maliki for the express purpose of being able to keep their OWN country secure...this was a Bi-partisan policy (that of training, equipping and supporting the Iraq army)  that both parties in the USA agreed was the best long term solution to the security of Iraq, the Middle east and as a COUNTER weight to IRAN.   Isis/ISIL gradually formed in Iraq, and later Syria after the Syrian uprising began, (and from the midst and hodge podge of dozens of other insurgent groups and gangs) over the time period from 2011, when the USA forces finally left en masse, up through the first major confrontation(s)  between ISIS and the refurbished IRAQI ARMY in the years 2012 & 2013.....We all know and are familiar with what happened when ISIS/ISL confornted the VASTLY superior IRAQI army (in terms of numbers and equipment and training....but not in the one area where it counts:  COurage & conviction.)    The IRAQIS literally threw away all the weapons and equipment the US taxpayers had paid for, and ran away.     Its that simple.....repeatedly this happened throughout the area and regions. SO, notes1, try and argue this intelligently and logically:   Why (or how) does repeating the same mistakes and policies of the past yield different or better results?   Why or (how) does the USA engage and guarantee the security of the middle east (and by extension our own soil) from terrorists like ISIS when the people who are literally right next door to them (Iraq) refuse or will not stand up to them despite EVERY SINGLE MANNER and expense of support the USA can (and has) given to them, free of charge?!?!?!?!?!?Please, make an effort to answer because quite frankly if you really do have a good idea or solution to this, I will resoundingly acknowledge and support it!And after you respond, i will make an effort to divulge what I think a reasonable strategy would be at this juncture to address ISIS/ISIL and the whole middle east TURD fest.....

[Carcounter]

Wow, Notes, I think you got DB's attention. From reading these posts, I can say I am almost certainly on the same page as Notes and Tedlark politically. DB, although much of what you said about ISIS/ISIL is correct as far as I can tell, I didn't see anyone here blame their rise on the current POTUS. Maybe I missed it, I am trying to also get some work done here, so I haven't followed all these threads. I think the problem with Obama is a lack of a plan to do anything, other than tell us they are contained, and then we have Paris and San Bernardino. BTW, Hillary Clinton also recently said that "we are right where we need to be" in our fight against ISIS. That may come back to haunt her. Have not heard a "plan" to defeat ISIS from any candidate from either side, but someone should make it a priority. If I had to pick a person I trusted on this, I would think Rubio who has chops on foreign relations or maybe even Christie. This will be a more important discussion once the republican field is winnowed down. Just my 2 cents.

[Carcounter]

I was wrong about Rubio. He does have a plan and it's on his website. Bullet points, but more than anyone else has put forth.

[Tedlark]

DaBurglar you can only perceive threats when you allow your mind to perceive threats. Was it an actual threat? Or was it a PERCEIVED threat? There is a difference.

[DaBurglar]

DaBurglar you can only perceive threats when you allow your mind to perceive threats. Was it an actual threat? Or was it a PERCEIVED threat? There is a difference. ?????   huh???   Can someone here please tell me WHAT exactly any president of any party could have done or should have done to STOP what actually took place in San Bernadino??    Please...lay it out for me....how does anyone stop two individuals who decide to do what they did?    The fact that they "Claimed" to represent ISIS is totally incidental and is no different than someone claiming Jodie Foster told them to do it, or their pet dog, or Demons, or Aliens....etc etc.    I am 100% serious......In actuality the fact.....FACT that one of the san bernadino sh*theads was allowed to LEGALLY purchase a gun in the manner he/she did is actually something a president COULD do something about, and lo and behold OBAMA is now attempting to do it....Having GUN SHOWS be held to the EXACT same standards as GUN DEALERSHIPS is totally reasonable, fair and RIGHT!   So why on earth is there opposition to this???   Simple....its the fact that it is OBAMA making the pitch....the republican white establishment automatically opposes anything this guy pitches, and that is also a fact, espeically since PAUL RYAN, the GOP House Speaker, himself once proposed and supported the EXACT same thing about GUN shows versus dealerships Also, BACKGROUND CHECKS on anyone trying to buy a gun is totally reasonable and RIGHT, and does not violate 2nd amendment rights.   So again, why oppose it??Someone respond or answer with concrete, intelligent thoughts please, to any of the issues I have raised in this thread.