The Fruits Of -EV Video Poker

I notice that Mr. Mendelson very meticulously sticks to defending Argentino's first claim mentioned in my #30 post, but studiously avoids the second Argentino claim. I doubt this is accidental.

What he is doing is using the past tense "Rob could have won" as a rationale to defend Argentino against "Rob is a liar and con man" statements. Mr. Mendelson completely ignores the more farfetched claim of Argentino's. The more farfetched claim is not that Argentino himself won, but that others can benefit and win using the Singer systems going forward.

Clearly, if dozens of people were to play the Singer systems, in aggregate, no amount of arguing "Rob could have won due to variance" means anything. The variance argument goes out of the window. Since consumer advocate reporters should, one would hope, care more about con men affecting others than about con men's biographical claims, the more important question in this debate is not whether "Did Rob win?" The more important question concerning the welfare of others is, "Do the Singer systems work for an aggregate of players using them, or is it a bad idea and a con?"

Mr. Mendelson, possibly by design, does not address any questions about an aggregate of others using the Singer systems.

Since he does not read my posts, would someone else be good enough to ask him why he avoids "Singer's" second claim so carefully? And does he really think it's a good idea to defend Singer systems since other people in aggregate may use them based on what Mr. Mendelson argues?

The main question isn't "Is Argentino a bad man and a con artist for his bio stories?" The main question is "Can Argentino be considered a bad man and con artist for saying that the systems will work for others, with the others being plural?" Mr. Mendelson, a former consumer reporter, is very, very careful to avoid the second question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I notice that Mr. Mendelson very meticulously sticks to defending Argentino's first claim mentioned in my #30 post, but studiously avoids the second Argentino claim. I doubt this is accidental.

What he is doing is using the past tense "Rob could have won" as a rationale to defend Argentino against "Rob is a liar and con man" statements. Mr. Mendelson completely ignores the more farfetched claim of Argentino's. The more farfetched claim is not that Argentino himself won, but that others can benefit and win using the Singer systems going forward.

Clearly, if dozens of people were to play the Singer systems, in aggregate, no amount of arguing "Rob could have won due to variance" means anything. The variance argument goes out of the window. Since consumer advocate reporters should, one would hope, care more about con men affecting others than about con men's biographical claims, the more important question in this debate is not whether "Did Rob win?" The more important question concerning the welfare of others is, "Do the Singer systems work for an aggregate of players using them, or is it a bad idea and a con?"

Mr. Mendelson, possibly by design, does not address any questions about an aggregate of others using the Singer systems.

Since he does not read my posts, would someone else be good enough to ask him why he avoids "Singer's" second claim so carefully? And does he really think it's a good idea to defend Singer systems since other people in aggregate may use them based on what Mr. Mendelson argues?

The main question isn't "Is Argentino a bad man and a con artist for his bio stories?" The main question is "Can Argentino be considered a bad man and con artist for saying that the systems will work for others, with the others being plural?" Mr. Mendelson, a former consumer reporter, is very, very careful to avoid the second question.

---

He is also on the prowl for 100 year olds with a million dollars to fuel his addiction. Truly a piece of work. I think he is trying to figure out a way to be a huckster for Robbochio's system. This will allow him to have a little supplemental income between 100 year olds. The only thing that matters to him is time on the craps table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Haven't been to a yard sale lately. Thanks for reminding me of what I'm missing. Pretty much nothing. I've seen more interesting setups in pictures of homeless camps.

---

You got that right, what a pile of shit lol...looks like some 99 year olds garage sale...the black particle board desk that needs to be assembled is an especially nice touch as well :)

Better to own a "pile of shit" than to be the pile of shit owned by a casino.

In any event, does anyone remember the stuff that Jacobson was trying to sell/pawn off on the WoV forum, years ago, after he decided (ran) to give up the AP stuff in Vegas?

Water or piss -stained furniture. How does it come to that for the AP's, and AP consultants?

Hell, THEY even talked about how crappy his stuff was.

This is F-ing retarded. Dan has stated unequivocally twice in the last 12 hours that what Rob claims is mathematically impossible, Just as most of us have been saying all along. And yet, Alan still defends Singer and his claims, saying, Dan, everyone else and the mathematics are wrong! It's 18 y.o.'s all over again with this guy! Alan and maybe one or two other of Singers supporters and enablers are the ones REALLY living in an alternative reality, because Singer has known all along that he is full of shit and attempting to pull the wool over everyone else eyes. Intentionally attempting to mislead and deceive other members.

I'll say that again, intentionally attempting to mislead and deceive other members and players. And almost always with these intentional misleadings there is a second part....for profit or money. There isn't a lot of talk of this for profit part of Singer's scam, until recently, but I always knew it had to be there. It has been suggested that once someone shows interest, Singer privately makes arrangements, to "teach" them his progressive system with stop limits in exchange for a cut of profits.

And yes, there very well could be....probably will be short term profits from a progressive system with stop limits. That is what they are designed for. But they cannot win longterm. This is Singer's scam. A progressive betting system with stop limits designed to show short term wins, but much bigger longterm losses. And he preys on his victims by scamming a portion of those short term wins before the "crash.

As I did on the blackjack site with a similar guy that was intentionally misleading members and players, I call on Todd (Dan Druff) to permanently ban Singer. It's not a free speech issue. It is a math and mathematical impossibility issue tied into a scamming issue. And that should not be tolerated on a forum designed to giving fair and truthful information about gambling and gambling math. This is not opinion, it is anti-mathematical possible. And allowing it delegitimizes the site itself as well as Dan Druff's reputation. PUT AN END TO THIS NOW, TODD!


AS for you Alan, if you are knowingly part of this scam, you should go too. If you are not, then stop supporting and enabling this scam and scammer. Your reputation and credibility is completely shot already over the 18 y.o.'s position that you refuse to back down from even though it has been proven impossible. Do you really want to double down on a second equally impossible claim, made even worse because it is all tied up with scamming people. Shyster is the word Alan. You complained about me using it. Stop participating in this scam and enabling this fraudulent scammer.

KJ. How many players got sucked into your very own blackjack nonsense talk across the internet? Even were you truly trying to be helpful to others learning the game of blackjack, what's the toll? Gotsta be far more than anything Alan and Singer have created.

As for you correcting others about blackjack, I find that very, very hard to believe. You can't answer even my questions about how you make what you claim, or how you stay under the radar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Better to own a "pile of shit" than to be the pile of shit owned by a casino.

In any event, does anyone remember the stuff that Jacobson was trying to sell/pawn off on the WoV forum, years ago, after he decided (ran) to give up the AP stuff in Vegas?

Water or piss -stained furniture. How does it come to that for the AP's, and AP consultants?

Hell, THEY even talked about how crappy his stuff was.

---

Ooohhhhh, good one Bill, very clever....isn’t it lunch or recess time at the looney asylum yet?....you seem to have so much free time lately, but I guess this is much better than talking to yourself at Fisk’s forum, no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

KJ. How many players got sucked into your very own blackjack nonsense talk across the internet? Even were you truly trying to be helpful to others learning the game of blackjack, what's the toll? Gotsta be far more than anything Alan and Singer have created.

As for you correcting others about blackjack, I find that very, very hard to believe. You can't answer even my questions about how you make what you claim, or how you stay under the radar.

---

Here's the thing Bill. You can choose to believe me or not to believe me. I will ask you this simple question: What am I selling? or how am I profiting? Because it looks like Singer is profiting or attempting to profit from his scam.

It's like I always say, "it doesn't take that much to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking". I feel pretty confident that anyone that has read my posts, knows that I know what I am talking about when it comes to blackjack card counting. I feel confident that even the likes of you and Alan have figured that out. Now you don't want to admit that to yourself or anyone else, because there is something else going on....you don't like me. And that too is your choice and I bring some of that on, but if you are honest with yourself, you know that I know what I am talking about. :)

I do not know how you or anyone can say that I don't answer your question(s). I answer more questions, often in too much detail...detail that is identifying and could present a risk to me, than any other professional or even semi-professional.....I will even use the word "serious" blackjack player on any forum I have seen. I am far, far more open about what I do and how I do it and try to share my experiences so that they may benefit others, that any other player I know. And in the last week I have done one hell of a lot of answering, even though it is guys like you and Alan that are only out to discredit me. You have one hell of a lot of nerve suggesting I don't answer your questions. :mad:

I'm "profitting from a scam"?

It'd be nice for you to clarify that with a few facts and details. Or would you prefer to be looked at as dumb as a bag of rocks, you know, like every time Nancy Pelosi thinks she's making some valid point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

KJ. How many players got sucked into your very own blackjack nonsense talk across the internet? Even were you truly trying to be helpful to others learning the game of blackjack, what's the toll? Gotsta be far more than anything Alan and Singer have created.

As for you correcting others about blackjack, I find that very, very hard to believe. You can't answer even my questions about how you make what you claim, or how you stay under the radar.

---

Here's the thing Bill. You can choose to believe me or not to believe me. I will ask you this simple question: What am I selling? or how am I profiting? Because it looks like Singer is profiting or attempting to profit from his scam.

It's like I always say, "it doesn't take that much to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking". I feel pretty confident that anyone that has read my posts, knows that I know what I am talking about when it comes to blackjack card counting. I feel confident that even the likes of you and Alan have figured that out. Now you don't want to admit that to yourself or anyone else, because there is something else going on....you don't like me. And that too is your choice and I bring some of that on, but if you are honest with yourself, you know that I know what I am talking about. :)

I do not know how you or anyone can say that I don't answer your question(s). I answer more questions, often in too much detail...detail that is identifying and could present a risk to me, than any other professional or even semi-professional.....I will even use the word "serious" blackjack player on any forum I have seen. I am far, far more open about what I do and how I do it and try to share my experiences so that they may benefit others, that any other player I know. And in the last week I have done one hell of a lot of answering, even though it is guys like you and Alan that are only out to discredit me. You have one hell of a lot of nerve suggesting I don't answer your questions. :mad:

---

I would never answer the questions you answer, kewlJ. You answer way too many.

For example, if I said you don't really have to win 52.4% of your sports straight plays to win because of offshore rebates, promo days with -105 or better, and the ability to negotiate lower juice with high volume, and somebody like Bill challenged me to provide specifics, I'd just roll my eyes and laugh. Why would anybody provide specifics to someone like that? I wouldn't provide specifics to my mother (God rest her soul). What would possibly be my motivation to tell somebody like Bill Yung which Las Vegas sports books provide lower juice for bigger players? What is the upside for me?


You gotta be kidding. Bill Yung is just some anonymous jibber-jabberer. Let him have his say. Nobody cares. So he ruins the site and confuses half the readers. That's on Dan. It's not up to kewlJ to let the two dozen forum lurkers know what can be done and how. Not worth it.

KewlJ, keep your specifics under wraps. You're much more vulnerable than someone like me, and I wouldn't share diddly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I'm "profitting from a scam"?

It'd be nice for you to clarify that with a few facts and details. Or would you prefer to be looked at as dumb as a bag of rocks, you know, like every time Nancy Pelosi thinks she's making some valid point?

---

Just curious, how many people have you meet up with and taught them your system? How many of them were successful? How much did they make and what levels did they play? How many of them are still playing consistently(or at all) still today? Has anyone consistently made a living playing your system for more than a year or two? When is the last time you taught someone? Are there any credible people who will tell us about their success? What about people who failed(ya, I know, if they failed it was their fault)?

Would you ever teach or show someone your system using your own money?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I'm "profitting from a scam"?

It'd be nice for you to clarify that with a few facts and details. Or would you prefer to be looked at as dumb as a bag of rocks, you know, like every time Nancy Pelosi thinks she's making some valid point?

---

Just curious, how many people have you meet up with and taught them your system? How many of them were successful? How much did they make and what levels did they play? How many of them are still playing consistently(or at all) still today? Has anyone consistently made a living playing your system for more than a year or two? When is the last time you taught someone? Are there any credible people who will tell us about their success? What about people who failed(ya, I know, if they failed it was their fault)?

Would you ever teach or show someone your system using your own money?

---

My friend, Joe, had the writing tell of finishing his missives with the question he most wanted answered. LOL. If Argentino can rally up the 57K in cash for a self-funded full demonstration, I'll be surprised.

Hey -- great idea. Rob will be in Tahoe with his family for Christmas. I'll be in Las Vegas Dec 16-20 (or more). Why not have Mr. Mendelson film Rob doing a self-funded demonstration? Everybody gets to ask questions. All on tape. It'd be great!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keystone

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Better to own a "pile of shit" than to be the pile of shit owned by a casino.

In any event, does anyone remember the stuff that Jacobson was trying to sell/pawn off on the WoV forum, years ago, after he decided (ran) to give up the AP stuff in Vegas?

Water or piss -stained furniture. How does it come to that for the AP's, and AP consultants?

Hell, THEY even talked about how crappy his stuff was.

---

Ooohhhhh, good one Bill, very clever....isn’t it lunch or recess time at the looney asylum yet?....you seem to have so much free time lately, but I guess this is much better than talking to yourself at Fisk’s forum, no?

---

Oh, no such luck. Just another mindless post from Keystone. But I must be getting warmer, as his "wit" becomes weaker.

The problem with your criticisms of Rob is that for years he reported big wins and even posted photos of big wins. People who bet big can win big. This argument that he can't win because of 99% games just doesn't explain the big winners, does it?

Again Rob had never produced proof of net profits but to say he can't win big because he's on 99% games falls short after years of reporting big wins.

If you want to challenge Rob in a meaningful way ask him for the proof, but don't just say it's impossible because it's very possible.

OK, Rob, where's the proof?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

There isn't a lot of talk of this for profit part of Singer's scam, until recently, but I always knew it had to be there. It has been suggested that once someone shows interest, Singer privately makes arrangements, to "teach" them his progressive system with stop limits in exchange for a cut of profits. This is Singer's scam...he preys on his victims by scamming a portion of those short term wins before the "crash.

---

Do you have any direct knowledge of all this, or are you fabricating the whole scenario?

Who suggested to you that this scam actually takes place, or ever took place?

I would expect that anyone who has been scammed by Singer would follow up with testimony to that effect, and expose him.

A google search of "Rob Singer" would lead them right to this forum, where they could recount their meeting with Singer and explain how they were scammed.

And--if the "students" are making a profit, whether short term, long term, or any other term, where is the scam? A profit is good---beats accumulated EV.

MaxPen I wouldn't mind an 85 year old with $15-million either. That's also a "100."

Ask redietz if he has any proof that Singer scammed or conned anyone? I never saw anyone at any time on any forum or website say that they were scammed or conned.

Have you?

By the way, a 70 year old with $30-million would be nice.

I have right of first refusal Alan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by regnis

And--if the "students" are making a profit, whether short term, long term, or any other term, where is the scam? A profit is good---beats accumulated EV.

---

So far the only "student" of Rob Singer that's stepped forward is slingshot.

I don't know if sling has ever met Singer, but it doesn't sound like he has any problem playing according to Singer's methods.

I wouldn't necessarily expect anyone who plays successfully using Singer's strategies to crow about that on any gambling forums, but those who have been scammed by Singer would certainly speak up and condemn him to anyone and everyone.