Printable View
Expect to hit a FH every ~86 hands. At 600 hands per hour, thats 7x$5 (from 7/5 to 8/5) difference. Playing for "many hours" (5?), that's $35x5 = $175.
Given that Alan bitched and moaned and thinks an extra 0.01% (or whatever the absolutely minuscule difference is in RC accumulation at Caesars for FP use), which is something like $100 per $1M coin-in......I think recommending 8/5 BP over 7/5 BP is fair.
As a matter of fact, I always play 8/5 Bonus when available and affordable. My big royals were both hit on 8/5 Bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
I have played 7/5 Bonus because I had a limited bankroll. Keep in mind that at Caesars the 8/5 Bonus games are at $5 and up denominations. When I am playing $1 and $2 bonus I have to play 7/5.
If there were 8/5 Bonus at Morongo at $1 I would have played it. I am going to ask again: where are those machines? I only saw 7/5 Bonus even at $5 per coin.
VPFree says "near pit bar" for $1 9/6 JoB, 8/5 BP, 9/6 DDB, and super aces (whatever that is).
I haven't been to Morongo in quite a while and don't know where the "pit bar" is. Nothing too particularly interesting at Morongo, although I've had some decent BJ play there. First time I have spread 1x$15 to 2x$400, didn't even get a glance from the pit.
I have no idea where the pit bar is either.
Morongo no longer has card craps.
There are no full pay games in the high limit room.
Super Aces Bonus Poker is a very popular game. I couldn't find it. It's still at Rincon (one machine) but the pay table was downgraded more than a year ago.
Is the BJ game decent there?Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
I stayed there for 2 nights in 2009, mainly to go elsewhere in the area, but I didn't notice any good BJ games.
When was the last time you were there, and what were the rules?
I miss playing BJ, as I don't want to count at casino groups which could ban me from a large number of properties, such as MGM or Caesars. But I'd totally do it at Morongo, as I don't give a crap about going back there.
True or not, you're telling him exactly what he wants to hear. Music to his ears, so to speak. But those two $25 RF's still eat away at him more than dozens of hungry ticks on a cow's ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I have never had a winning year at casino gambling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I have never had a winning year in VP, whether playing frequently or infrequently. I have had winning years in horses, craps and sports almost every year, although this is going to be a losing year in horses unless I have a hot streak these last few months. I no longer bet sports and, as related in another thread, I rarely play craps anymore.
That sounds real close to what wizard told me about him.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
There are games people win at and games people lose at in gambling. The same can be said for life in general. Other than my successful but controversial vp play, I've had my ups & downs in life--which the vast majority of players experience as downs when playing vp.
My working career was stellar and I highly exceeded my expectations. However, a bad personal business decision combined in smaller part with failed "vp AP" play led to my filing a BK in '96. (which detractors feel good about over and over again when they get fed up with my winning). But as with people like Trump, I used the law to my total benefit and I came out of it losing nothing but debt. In retirement the game does not end. Yes we chose to distribute our children's' inheritances in living form by buying them both houses in their names, but while my vp has overall been even more successful, proportionately, than when I played as a pro, I got clobbered on taxes because of some huge jackpots due to my not being properly prepared. And to the delight of even more of you and while none of this matters any longer, there's the RV anomaly that bit me hard. Our very first RV, which we used to train on in every sense of the word, was bought with a down-payment. But it turned out to be a total lemon, it caused a ton of the Dan-type arguing with various entities, and we decided to just dump it back off at the dealer. Instead, we went up to Oregon and bought a real one....a Newall, which when we finally sold it last year lost us over $600k.
Why tell about this? Because Dan and some others seem to think I brag about this and that (my family is my #1 accomplishment) as in being some sort of wealthy person or something. I am not and never was. My wife and I just worked hard at our jobs and our marriage, I took a chance at and was a successful pro vp player, and because we prepared for retirement we are reaping the benefits from our years of effort.
Nothing in life always goes smoothly. But if you use your head then the inevitable bumps and sometimes crashes can be used as stepping stones to a better, more secure future, and not as things to permanently keep you down.
That was my story. Once I started the strategies, I saw no reason to stop playing when ahead- and why should I? Being ribbed on every side that I should be able to play on and win even more if what I believed was true. I threw away a lot of "small" wins. Didn't take long to learn from my mistakes.
You'll never see this again in your lifetime.
Check this out. Two ETSU students pick two basketball players to attempt half court shots for them...with free tuition on the line.
http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/
That's how I got married!!!
Hi Redietz:
Great video! The best thing is the students cannot keep playing until they lose their winnings like after a Jackpot in slots or Royal in VP. Come to think of it, the students probably did not "win" free tuition, their parents did!
FAB
The weirdest things about that video -- the students chose the players they wanted to shoot for them. You can see a female player there -- the women's hoops team was there, also. But the two students picked the players they wanted. Then, after the first youngster makes the shot, the second, older player says he guarantees he'll make the shot.
You couldn't script it any better. You'd swear it was a Disney clip with special effects.
All degenerate gamblers never do, unless it's a real big hit just before midnight on December 31.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I know some degenerate gamblers who do win.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhole
I have never had a winning year at casino gambling.
Based on your own posts I could only assume that for one, you make and have plenty of money to piss away. Two, you are a degenerate compulsive gambler and regardless of your two 100K wins I do believe you never had a winning year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I could only guess that you keep posting that you never had a winning year as if your trying to say your slick and to read between the lines. At your level of play a 10/30K losing session could take less time to happen than eating a dinner.
To prove you are a losing gambler why not post your win/loss statements from the casinos for the year you won two 100k RF’s. With all your free play throughout the year (including your free play settlement for your serious injury) that would be a more interesting (win/lose) statement to view then any tax return you were trying to get from other members here trying to prove them as alleged winners.
Since we already know you’re always a loser since you endlessly keep repeating that, post that win/lose statement which is related to gambling only and nothing to do with your work or taxes.
Maybe, you could help gamblers to realize that even if they made and won as much as you do, it still doesn’t matter since you will always end up a loser. Who knows how many families you may prevent from eventually facing disaster if they can’t control their gambling habits. After all, you are in the business of helping people save money, why not their lives?
Still with the passive/aggressive I see. Alan did post his w/l statement from CET one time. If I recall, it showed over $1 million plus coin in and a net loss (correct me if I'm wrong Alan).Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhole
Most recreational gamblers will have a net loss, unless they happen to hit a big score along the way. I'm a net loser lifetime in gambling, as I don't play at anything higher than quarter VP, it will probably always remain that way.
I'm a much bigger lifetime loser at Disneyland than CET and no comps to offset it. Do you need to see my receipts from my last three trips to believe me?
I think Alan by saying he's never had a winning year, means he's never had a winning year. At least it's a breath of fresh air from the chest beating bullshit winners that post on here.
Are you a degenerate compulsive gambler?
degenerate gambler
individual who possesses a one-way ticket to prison. who gambles not only their money and reputation, but also their sexual organs, their best friends, and their dreams by acting in ways which consequences forever ignite the most feared, internal nightmare. who consistently acts in ways that have proven unsavory time and time again in their past, yet who fail to yield the self-discipline and willpower in the present moment to learn a new way which most likely will lead to increased well-being. the only occasions that inspire them to attempt to make deep corrections to their internal affairs are hospitalization or the charge of felony. as much as you want to support the degenerate gambler because he or she is your friend, there comes a time when you must move on with your own hard-earned lifestyle and at the most, infrequently say a prayer for your ol' pal at the bedside.
So Alan--Blackhole feels that you qualify under this definition. He wants to see your win-loss statements. Why not just show him your sexual organs, or lack thereof.
I've always wanted to be a degenerate gambler. Does it take much practice? Is it as bad as what happens in Reefer Madness, or somehow worse? Is it a good excuse to be a sexual predator, or embezzle from the church, or anything like that? I could always use a good excuse.
When Rob was a degenerate gambler, did he have to use a different restroom? I was thinking of getting an operation so I too could be a transdegenerate.
Sorry Redietz--until you gamble away your sexual organs you are just a wannabe.
And congrats to the man who has organs--not organ.
I never posted my actual win loss statement but a few years ago I did have $1.29-million in W2Gs and my loss that year actually matched the expected return (loss) playing that particular game which was 9/5 Double Double Bonus. I mentioned that particular year in a discussion about expected return.
I have never had a profitable year gambling. However I will say that hitting two $100k royals in two years closed the losing gap to a very small amount.
For the record in the past year my free play offers from Caesars were limited to $300 or less per month.
You were down over 6 figures at one point each year in 2 consecutive years?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
My guess he's in a much higher tax bracket than you coach.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Unless the Coach is Jim harbaugh at around 9.5 million per year.
Sounds like he Romped Through Town and out of a 6 figure loss...when you're down $100K bump your game up to $25 per credit.Quote:
Originally Posted by james40
I am like Jim Harbaugh...just not as nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
Not necessarily down by that much... but after winning so much there is no fear about continuing to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
I admit the degenerate adjective before compulsive was a little over the top while describing my opinion of Alan. Yet, I’m certain Alan understood my point. We’re both old timers and been around the gambling world likely longer than most here.
Someone asked if I was a compulsive gambler earlier. Like Alan I was and still do have the funds to justify my stupidity in the past. But, if I didn’t snap out of my stupidity of believing the losses were just a result of my chosen form of personal entertainment I felt entitled to, I’m not sure how much damage I may have done.
Alan knows exactly what I’m saying, and 100k gambling losses for a year are average and expected.
Every person’s level of play of course is different. Based on what I’m reading in this forum, most here can’t even relate to Alan's level of play, both time and money invested.
I'm actually speaking prematurely about 2016. It's possible I could have a profit this year. But working against me is my "royal count." I had only three this year and two were $1 royals ($4,000). If I have a bad run between now and New Year's Eve at higher limits I could go into the red. I was not doing well up until that $100K royal.
I can't understand playing at a level where losing 6 figures a year is expected, and only getting $300 per month in free play offers.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhole
up until about a year ago I was getting $2500 a month in free play.
If someone wins $100K in a jackpot, but then loses $101K during the rest of the year, their loss for the year is only one-thousand dollars.
Here's another example: you lose $50,000 during the first half of the year, then win $100K, then lose $51,000 during the second half of the year, and the loss for the year is $1,000.
Alan, did you ever get the 4x$2500 / month FP? I think Caesars stopped sending those out 1.5-2 years ago. (I never got in that bracket, started playing towards the end of that...bastards!)
I never heard of a promotion that gave 4X $2500 a month. The maximum I ever got was $2500 for one visit during a month.
Interesting how various people have little problem embracing--and indeed, cuddling up to--others who admit to being losers at vp. Alan's already explained his bad luck (I mean, in jbjb's terminology, "unexpected distribution") when it comes to successful marriages, and the same people have fun with that. I guess if he said he actually lives in Reseda or some other flop house-littered struggling community, it would make everyone feel even better.
It is VERY true vp winners are few and far between, and it's very obvious everyone here understands why. Virtually no one can win and stay ahead, because after they've fallen under the spell of the casino, its slot club, the ambience and of course the extreme addiction of playing the poker computers, no matter where that casino is located, the reasons and excuses and "nothing else really matters" justifications simply drive the problem gamblers back to that casino over and over and over again. Until they're broke, they've lost all including their families, and even their self-dignity. And all that makes for fun reading on the Internet.
So it's a shame people never understand the power of discipline and determination when playing video poker. Again I ask all you losers: had you quit while playing on every single machine you've ever played the first time you got ahead (whether it's a nickel, a dollar, or $4000....) how much better would your results be today?
And no whining about how "most of the time that wouldn't have even been worth my time" or "that usually wouldn't have even covered my gas" or "I also make those trips to stay for a few days of other type entertainment too!". If you understand what this means, you're smart enuf to understand how using a better strategy that is driven by this simple concept can be an enormous positive to your results.
Learn from your mistakes people, and don't just keep repeating them. Understand what you're doing by losing is EXACTLY how the casinos want you to act. Know that by staying on casino radar by using hosts, signing up for casino credit or check cashing, using casino ATM's, or running back every time a casino sends you an offer, all you're doing is becoming a facilitator to your own losing.
I won over $25k on a stopover at South Point in early June. I've been back in once last month and won nearly $2k. Still no offers. I called yesterday, they gave me VIP, and I asked why. This person had no clue, so I asked "if I come in for a night in Dec. can it be comped"? She said yes. So I asked "and since I rarely come to LV any longer, could you see if we could get a $500 comp to Michael's"? She said she had to check with someone on that, and a guy came on and said yes.
So how many times have we seen idiots on vpfree and elsewhere claim they got all their comps "erased" and how they've been "86'd" for being "feared advantage players at SP who are four figures ahead"? It's obviously all BS. And this should put to rest Dan's claim that it's unusual how he is supposedly getting more than he deserves so he's been shut down on comps....if in fact that's what he's saying.
All casinos are different, and this is where Dan's inexperience with the vast amount of casinos around Nevada is hurting him. If you stay attached to one casino or chain you will never understand that the true advantage is in exploiting ALL of them in their own ways, and not simply staying foolishly addicted to one and then constantly complain about it.
Watching Dan and his continuous P-A-I-N with CET is like watching mickeycrimm trying to navigate around his cabinet of cheap whiskey as he dreams up more of his make-believe gambling tales.
Rob you haven't been in Reseda lately. It has million dollar houses like the rest of LA.
I don't understand the rest of your post. I think what you're missing is that many if not all recreational players aren't going to casinos to win a nickel or a dollar or even a hundred dollars. They're going in pursuit of the big win and have set aside a budgeted amount to try to get that big win.
Recreational players are different from professional players. Pro players must have their strict discipline for showing a profit. The recreational players will play their budgeted amount and enjoy the ups and downs.
Don't think all recreational players are problem players. Some people really do have a good time at casinos, win or lose.
My example was a baseline. People SAY they want to win but they really don't. They're there for that one big hit like you said, and when they get it even THAT overwhelmingly doesn't make them quit. People win and they want to win more. They crave that need for even more gratification. It is stupid beyond words. A lack of self-discipline at its finest.
You usually play on after a big hit, setting lower points of being ahead before you leave. While that makes little sense to me, it is FAR better than what the vast majority of players always do by playing on with no goals or reason other than to experience the intermittent gratification of another big or bigger win that usually does not come.
And I'm not someone who readily believes you lose.
Rob there's nothing wrong with playing and losing if it's fun and affordable. When you spend $200 to play golf I hope it's also fun and affordable. When you go RVing I hope it's also fun and affordable. Profit is not a measure of entertainment. I never had a profit after going to a movie or comedy club. I saw the new Tom Hank's Inferno movie last night. Had fun -- no profit.
I've profited off of WWF events and the Stanley Cup Finals one year in the 90's. EBay was lax back then on limits you could sell extra tickets for.
P.S. I really would've loved to get Cubs World Series tix for resale.
Alan that's what's called entertainment expense as you know. We all have that to different degrees. Lots of people get all excited about going to their Friday night poker games, where they hope they win but if not then it's an entertainment expense of one degree or the other.
But the purpose of ANY internet gambling forum is not to talk about gambling's "entertainment value" but to glean as much info as possible in an effort to become a better player....i.e., to Win Money. Not to see how many comps one can accumulate so players can apply needed values in order to pretend they've had a winning year or to claim they've justified all their play by performing this magic trick in front of others.
Others come here to teach common sense to players, and that's what I've always done. When you always have a winning year playing a particular way after having nothing but losing years playing a very popular but very flawed and misleading method, it is not a burden to keep explaining why. It's also why I never had a problem writing a free weekly Gaming Today column for nearly 8 years, and why I've never charged a cent to anyone I've trained both at the machines and thru other forms of communication.
So posters can ignore, praise, criticize or say anything they choose to about what I say--I KNOW from the massive amount of emails I've received over the years and even today, that a difference has been and is being made in both the winning and enjoyment levels. And you can see it in the posts of those who sit at the altar of losing: they HATE and chase anyone who has the courage to say anything positive about others' improvement in entertainment and/or winning because of my teaching. The rest simply stay away and only choose to talk to me--including at least 3 of the members here who would probably feel totally embarrassed if their handles got out.
That alone is pure entertainment!
Yeah...that idiot Phil Ivey should've been playing video poker chasing losses instead of AP'ing baccarat to the tune of almost $20 million. That way, no moronic judge could screw him.
Rob people take tennis lessons and golf lessons even when they play for entertainment and have no plans for being a pro. People need to know about comps and players clubs. So all this info has a useful purpose.
What visitors here should be aware of are anonymous posters claiming they've beaten the casinos. That is the true danger.
I agree. We don't want the competition. It's getting tougher these days with morons like Eliot Jacobson out there.
I understand and accept the whole alleged AP thing. I’m certain there are players that are really good at it, and probably others not so much. I could only assume that in time (I won’t be around to see it) most gamblers will eventually catch on and all sign up for the AP career leaving only grandmas and compulsive gamblers for the casinos to fight over. This should reduce the casinos numbers even more and eventually lead to disaster. After all, the free money, free rooms, free food, and free beverage well would have to run dry.
Stop bringing up guys like Phil Ivey has if he’s the great AP king. He no doubt is a great successful poker player, but getting involved with Sun and destroying his reputation, (not with ap’s I know) but with future advertising deals, etc., and no doubt burning up positive EV with other casino special high roller deals, was obviously an attempt for a big grab to feed his other gambling addictions. He loses 1 to 2 million dollars per craps session and certainly that won’t last.
In the meantime, if anyone has any doubt who is doing the ass kicking in the gambling world, pull up in any state they exist, the casinos gaming revenue information.
It's so good guys like you exist. The less that believe the better.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhole
I didn’t say I don’t believe. Besides, didn’t you rate your AP talents similar to those of James Grosjean's? Your own quote, “I'll take mine and James Grosjean's skill over Rob and Alan's luck any day of the week!!”Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
I suspect that would put you in the top 1 or 2 percent of AP’s? With that kind of income why would you be here trying to convince us of its existence? What level of education did you complete?
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. All I've said is that I utilize the same type of plays. Anything else is none of anyone else's business except for the IRS. 20 years ago, I'd have thought the same as you. But I've opened my eyes and looked around.
Exactly my point, good things spread like cancer. How many eyes need to open before the good thing burns out? Casinos are already endlessly adjusting games and comps.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
I feel obligated to point out that games of opinion are beatable.
One quote that comes to mind is this:
"It must be true, I saw it on the Internet."
Frankly I don't believe anyone. I've seen tax returns that were improperly prepared, and I've seen claims that I have a hard time understanding why anyone with such knowledge would spend their time here telling us how great they are.
Rob will be sorry to hear that.
Finally, a point of view I can agree with. If bullshit were gold, there would be some very rich people here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
The only reasons why I believe Rob (and theyre damn good reasons) is that for years I read his articles and I seriously doubt the publisher would allow his false claims to be published. And... I was with Rob at a certain casino in the high limit room to shoot one of our videos and I got to talk to someone who knows about Rob's play.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Now... while I never endorsed his play or his strategy I have every reason to believe that as a high limit player he did have yearly net profits of $100,000 a year. Frankly, when you play $25 video poker it's not hard.
If I didn't play craps, my profits would be way up there too. It is because of craps that I have net losses. I am way ahead at video poker... and I've had two $100K royals and Rob has only had one.
You also believe in the nonsense of DI and a doctor you saw throw ONCE. Let's not forget about the mythical 18 yos in a row.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Rob has no proof his strategy works. He only produces insults when confronted for proof it works. Nobody cares about the monetary portion whether it's $100 or $100,000. Showing a few jackpot pictures isn't proof of shit. W/L statements and tax returns don't prove shit. Provide mathematical proof THE STRATEGY works. That's all anyone that asks about it wants. Me personally, couldn't care less. My only disagreement is in chasing losses by going up in denomination on any casino game. Doing that is a death wish to your bankroll.
I sold a pair last Saturday for $7,000 each.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
I do believe that DI is possible even though I can't do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
I have seen three players who I would consider DIs, and possibly a fourth.
Yes, I was at a craps table at Caesars Palace when a RANDOM shooter threw 18 yos (11) in a row.
I agree, Rob has no proof that his strategy works. Except over the years he reported a lot of big wins and someone playing at his level could certainly have a profit of $100K a year. Frankly, if I didn't play craps, I could have profits of close to that for this year and last. That gives you an idea of how much money I lost at craps.
It's interesting you say that "W/L statements and tax returns don't prove" the claims, but mathematical proof that a strategy works is proof enough for you? Well, we agree that Rob has no mathematical proof. But math doesn't explain how I sat down with $2000 at a $25 VP machine at Caesars and hit a $100K royal in 2015, and how with $2500 this past October I sat down and hit another $100K royal. Oh... and I was playing 8/5 Bonus which is a negative expectation game. By your reasoning that the math governs all, I guess I shouldn't have hit those royals??
Alan, are you kidding me? It's called getting lucky (or being on the far right side of variance).Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Nobody's saying that you cannot win with Rob's strategy. Hell you can win with any strategy, including the one where you make the worst possible hold every time.
I won $60 this morning playing $0.25 VP while getting a drink at the bar in between putting bets in at the sportsbook. That is not proof my system is a winner.
If I told you my coin-flipping system allows me to flip a coin to land on heads every single flip.....would 1 flip be enough for you?
RS__ as I said: I believe Rob won. I don't know if he won because of his system. I don't follow his system. Maybe he just got lucky. And maybe his system helps him to get lucky? All I said was I believe he won a hundred thou a year. That's all.
You also said "It's interesting you say that "W/L statements and tax returns don't prove" the claims, but mathematical proof that a strategy works is proof enough for you?" insinuating mathematical proof is "not enough" or is not valid.
RS___, it is interesting that you wrote this:
Of course I believe the math, as in the math needed to compile accurate win/loss statements and tax returns. However, your buddy jbjb seemed to be insinuating that math theory and not win/loss and tax statements are the necessary proof. Here again is what he wrote in its entirety:Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
Again, I know of no theoretical or mathematical proof that Rob's strategy beats "the math" of the game. Yet, he could have had profitable years. I only play negative expectation video poker, yet I have had winning years at video poker in 2015 and 2016 due to LUCKY $100,000 ROYALS. I only wish I was as lucky in craps.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Now, if you can show me some proof that the publisher of Gaming Today permitted Rob to publish false articles for all those years, then we have something to talk about.
Math is for losers when playing casino VP.
Is that why you're scared to relay on VP only for all of your income? We all know you pussies can't rely on VP to make money and make lousy excuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
All I know is I went last week, played my $30 freeplay thru once- ended up with $59.75. Had I stayed I woulda given it all back like all the other pussies. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
On & on. How many times has it been explained that math alone WILL NOT be the proof needed that any type of play strategy works? AP's like to claim they "win" because they supposedly only play in theoretically positive EV situations. And this is nothing but a weak cop-out, because not ONE of these theorists has ever provided any type of proof that they've actually won anything. Their constant "the math proves I win" is tiring, and I & GT enjoyed putting these fools to bed with many of my articles.
In my strategy's case, there is and has always been factoring required just to show how result-positive my strategy really is, and the strict math people have never and would never accept it. But for those who are able to use that supercomputer attached to their neck, they would be able to figure out that the only way to consistently win and win big on casino vp games, which are notoriously -EV already, is to develop a cunning method of injecting as much luck into the mix as well as seriously reducing the number of losing sessions played. I've succeeded on both counts.
Finally, while no one can ever prove any claims beyond posting actual big wins etc. or by saying "you have to believe I win actual money because the math says I should" (of course the math in this case means including a heavy dose of self-valuing slot club benefits) I am the only one as far as I know, who has ever offered a large public bet that included complete and detailed tracking along with accepting an official arbitrator's ruling if it came to that. And along with the fact that I've never charged a cent for training, advice, or took a penny to write any of my columns, what I have to offer as far as having actually won what I said I did far exceeds simply accepting any theoretical mumbo-jumbo.
Alan, here is a simple proof that Rob's system is not a winner.
X < 0
K > 0
X * K = P
Therefore
P < 0
X is player advantage
K is money in action
P is profit (resulting in a negative number)
Rob has shown 0 proof his system works. I wonder why. (Not really.)
Alan, what do you think is more likely -- Rob has a winning system or he used gambling/VP as a way to launder illegally obtained money?
That's about as stupid as it gets. How about you showing proof YOUR system works, if you even play at all, that is.
RS__ as I said many times. I fully believe Rob won a hundred thousand a year because he was playing $25 video poker. It is relatively easy to hit the required big wins to call it quits when a $100K win goal was reached.
What I doubt -- and I've also said this before -- are Rob's claims that he played so little and still managed to win $100K a year. It would make more sense to me that a "lucky" player who played a lot of $25 video poker could have enough quads to reach that $100K win goal. It becomes difficult for me to believe he won that much playing as little as he said he played in certain years.
I also question how he paid zero taxes because of claimed business deductions that included parties and entertaining and even groceries.
But as far as winning $100K a year playing $25 video poker? Of course it's not only possible but it's very possible when his "special games" include Triple Double Bonus and his "daily game" was 8/5 Bonus. Please note for all of you APs: 8/5 Bonus is a full pay game.
OK, I acted like a bonehead and posted again on this forum-senior moment. One last parting comment: NO one on this forum has tried to either play or understand even the best (IMHO) strategy- artt. No one on this forum has accepted a FREE offer to try it at WHATEVER denomination. Therefore, there is NO proof - mathematical or observational his strategies work. I can't believe that no one gets this. I especially can't fathom Alan, with all his opportunities and interviews at least observing just one session. Just very perplexing.
Sling... Rob watched me play for a short time. I played conventional video poker. In fact, Rob corrected me when I made an error in conventional video poker. There were no "special play" opportunities in the short time Rob watched me played.
For the record: Rob says he makes special plays 5% of the time, otherwise he is playing conventional strategy and he always plays the best pay tables available. His critics continually pick on him when he says you can still hit big winners on less than the best pay tables. And what Rob says is true. Royals and quads pay the same whether you are playing 8/5 Bonus or 7/5 Bonus, etc.
As far as his ARTT and other "systems" I still don't understand what they are, I don't know how to play them, and I've never sat with Rob at a machine long enough to learn or experience it.
Remember, I was interviewing Rob to get his "special plays" recorded in one place. At the time I did those interviews I had no idea there were even things such as his ARTT and other strategies. I learned about them later.
The problem with what Rob just said is that it's strictly, as Alan says, a "man in the street" paragraph.
Anyone who has won the lottery, or MegaBucks slots, or pushed the "random" button and won the weekly Boyd football contest, would be able to say the same things and be absolutely correct. They inserted luck (somehow), and were disciplined (so they might say) to not blow the wad on further lottery or MegaBucks slots. Proving they've won is easy. Telling other people to do as they do, well, that may not be the most ethical thing in the world.
About 30 years ago, a guy by the name of Edmund Slick won the World Cup of Handicapping, a one-weekend event at Caesars Palace with a 1K entry price tag. He wore a beautiful tux to all the functions, and he had glowing astrological symbols on the lapels and all over his tux. He did indeed win, and he claimed his astrological abilities enabled him to do so. Now should this dude have been taken seriously? Who am I to judge?
OK, Alan. Got it FWIW, much of his strategy play is conventional,also. And it's nowhere near a Martingale system.
Don't we all make "special plays" every so often?
Not with money on the line. Not even for a cup of coffee.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So... you've never played Bonus video poker and you were dealt AAAJJ and just held the aces? I admit I did it ONCE and I got lucky and got the ace.
Just think. You coulda had a cup of coffee!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Alan, I already showed that for someone to win $1M playing solely $25 TDB, that'd be in the 5+ standard deviation ball park. I think I'd be more likely to believe you saw 16 yo's in a row than Rob being up $1M.
And there you have it. The local AP genius believes I played only $25 and only TDB.
The level of make-believe deduction presented by an anonymous armchair gambler gets more entertaining all the time.
I saw 18 yo's in a row.
And what are the odds of hitting a $25 royal with $2000 in the machine the first time, and then hitting a $25 royal with $2500 the second time?
And I've had four dealt royals.
Shit happens.
Like 18 yo's in a row.
The math guys just can't accept it.
I was responding to what Alan said. I didn't say I think you solely played $25 TDB, just that I did the math for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I don't care to do the math for it, but I think $25 TDB would have the best shot at winning $1M (except for $50 or $100 denom games).
Playing $25/coin video poker to win one million dollars sounds like a wondrous thing to do. But Rob won $100,000 a year and did that each year for ten years. When you break it down year by year, winning $100K is not as wondrous and becomes more real and easier to accept. Don't you think?Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
He doesn't even need to hit a royal flush to win $100K playing $25/coin bonus or triple double bonus.