Dan deleting posts and threads ?

Dan, my question is why do you allow this?

You obviously have figured out that this Rob Singer person is doing nothing but trolling? His so called "system" is complete bullshit and other than that all he does is viciously attack other members that point out that his "system" is mathematically flawed and impossible.


Allowing these vicious attacks is a reflection on you and is the sole reason this site does not grow. And it's funny Dan, not long ago you posted that being Jewish, you took offense to some anti-semitic comments and would not tolerate them, but yet you allow this complete asshole and nothing but a troll to attack my late partner with comments that he died from aids (absolutely no truth). And before that you allowed similar attacks by this same asshole to another member, redeitz, concerning his wife that passed.

Besides the inconsistency, I ask where is your sense of decency, Todd? Or do you just look the other way because this complete asshole, keeps discussing going and that is what is important to all you forum owners? Shame on you Todd.

Kewlj for the umpteenth time Rob's system is not mathematically flawed because he makes no mathematical claims. Are you listening?

His entire system is based on having a big bankroll and stopping with a relatively small profit.

Do you still follow?

If he's lucky he'll hit some big winner at $1 video poker. But if he doesn't he'll use that big bankroll to move up as high as $25 or even $100 per coin VP.

What you refuse to grasp is that Rob considers the winning session to be over once he has a profit of only $2500 on a $57,000 bankroll. That's only a return of about 4-percent.

Yes, with a $57,000 bankroll playing 8/5 Bonus Poker (his MAIN game) you can at some point have a profit of 4-percent. If you ignore all of the other side talk I think even you kewlj can accept the very real possibility of a 4% gain on a $57,000 bankroll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj for the umpteenth time Rob's system is not mathematically flawed because he makes no mathematical claims. Are you listening?

His entire system is based on having a big bankroll and stopping with a relatively small profit.

Do you still follow?

If he's lucky he'll hit some big winner at $1 video poker. But if he doesn't he'll use that big bankroll to move up as high as $25 or even $100 per coin VP.

What you refuse to grasp is that Rob considers the winning session to be over once he has a profit of only $2500 on a $57,000 bankroll. That's only a return of about 4-percent.

Yes, with a $57,000 bankroll playing 8/5 Bonus Poker (his MAIN game) you can at some point have a profit of 4-percent. If you ignore all of the other side talk I think even you kewlj can accept the very real possibility of a 4% gain on a $57,000 bankroll.

---

Alan you are so freaking stupid. No wonder you are a broke degenerate gambler. Having a big bankroll and stopping with a small profit cannot produce longterm wins, like a million dollars over 10 years. That is complete mathematical bullshit!

So NO Alan, a $57,000 bankroll playing 8/5 Bonus Poker (his MAIN game) you CANNOT at some point have a profit of 4-percent, Longterm and that is what we are talking about....LONGTERM….10 years!. There is NO possibility.

Exactly as I've said Alan. The doofus is so invested into the making up of his "+EV bj pro" virtual reality internet forum life, that he is far too afraid to even begin to address the inconsistencies about individual session probability magically changing out of thin air.

Maybe his TV went on the blink? :)

Honestly, not being a person who gets some kind of thrill in having action (degenerate gambler), I often wondered how the casino industry could pull it off for so long. I mean there is mathematical knowledge and proof out there, easily attainable. I always wondered how this math, some how eluded the degenerate gamblers? :confused:

Now I know. It is the old "lead a horse to water, but can't make him drink" scenario. Some of the degenerate gamblers on this site, have been lucky enough to have math guys, much smarter than me (I just use the math), explain it to them over and over and OVER, and have endured all the insults and name calling and still the degenerate gamblers insist the earth is FLAT! And they remain angry, bitter and broke because they refuse to learn.

No more for me. I am done. I really am. This site is the pure definition of insanity. Over and over and over we go. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj for the umpteenth time Rob's system is not mathematically flawed because he makes no mathematical claims. Are you listening?

His entire system is based on having a big bankroll and stopping with a relatively small profit.

Do you still follow?

If he's lucky he'll hit some big winner at $1 video poker. But if he doesn't he'll use that big bankroll to move up as high as $25 or even $100 per coin VP.

What you refuse to grasp is that Rob considers the winning session to be over once he has a profit of only $2500 on a $57,000 bankroll. That's only a return of about 4-percent.

Yes, with a $57,000 bankroll playing 8/5 Bonus Poker (his MAIN game) you can at some point have a profit of 4-percent. If you ignore all of the other side talk I think even you kewlj can accept the very real possibility of a 4% gain on a $57,000 bankroll.

---

Is it possible here and there...yes.

Is it possible to rely on day after day...hell no!!!

If you think otherwise, do it 8 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 a year. Guaranteed anyone trying this will go broke!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Alan you are so freaking stupid. No wonder you are a broke degenerate gambler.

---

Upon reflection, it may be that alan is not in fact "broke."

People assume that just because he won't pay his son for his services that he cannot afford to pay him.

That may be true, but there is another possibility: it could simply be a "business decision" not to pay.

Sounds like his income from his bestbuys business has tanked, and if as I suspect the business is a corporation then the debt would be owed by the corporation and not by alan personally.

True, only an asshole would use the corporate shell to fuck over a family member but then again alan rubbed shoulders with the big boys in LA, where the name of the game is to screw people over: "That's just business."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Here is the Rob Singer challenge: https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...-25k-challenge

It's a trick where Rob wants you to bet against him having "winning sessions", where the catch is that he can keep doing a Martingale betting progression to where there is a high chance he will come out a small amount ahead (and a small chance he will come out way behind).

By getting people to bet against him being able to "come out ahead", and the bet being as large as $25k, that makes the normally -EV Martingale strategy into something +EV (due to the $25k boost for successfully Martingale-ing).

When people refuse this trick bet, Rob insists it's because they're scared of betting against his winning strategy.

I offered instead to cross-book a video poker session of his, where I win or lose what he casino wins or loses, and he refused. That would be the fair way to do it, but he won't because he knows that wouldn't give him an edge.

---

Dan you really, REALLY don't know what you're talking about with this post.

There is no "trick" or "catch"--it was simply me playing my strategy, which includes a structure of going up AND DOWN in denomination AND game volatility. "Martingale" is how frustrated people who don't understand what I do, like to explain it. You also were quick to point out the better-than-small chance I'd see big winners. I know, I know....no confused critic ever wants that to be possible.

Your offer of a different type of bet was odd and ultimately, irrelevant. If you believe my strategy gives me an edge, then you wouldn't be claiming it "loses" or rejecting my challenge in favor of playing some silly, alternate way. The strategy is the strategy. The criticisms are the criticisms. The challenge addresses both of those. You wanted to change the bet and the way I play in favor of some meaningless method having nothing to do with anything I do. The point of doing that makes no sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Exactly as I've said Alan. The doofus is so invested into the making up of his "+EV bj pro" virtual reality internet forum life, that he is far too afraid to even begin to address the inconsistencies about individual session probability magically changing out of thin air.

Maybe his TV went on the blink? :)

---

Shut the fuck up you inbred piece of shit, scumbag scammer Argentino. That is exactly what you are... a predatory scumbag scammer, much the same as the casino industry itself.


Your use of a "penname" was not about the usual reasons an author might use a penname. It was about hiding who you really are and you were too stupid to even pull that off. People easily discovered who you really are and easily looked into your scumbag past of dooping and screwing people. Numerous judgements, evictions, welfare fraud easily attainable.

You are nothing but a real piece of shit, scumbag, internet troll. It sucks that you have found a sympathetic forum owner that just doesn't give a shit and allows you to prey on and try scam the member of his site like this, when he himself KNOWS the math.

Again, Shame on YOU Todd Wittles!

And yes, MrV, Alan IS broke....well 3 and a half weeks out of any month anyway. :rolleyes: He may have a good pention and hopefully pays his rent first, but that is the only thing keeping him from being one of these guys sitting on the overpass on Las Vegas Blvd holding a sign. They all knew how to beat the casinos using flawed math and proven failed "systems" too.

I'm not going to stoop to the level of the trolls.

Jbjb did make a point that needs a response. Jbjb wrote:

"Is it possible here and there...yes.

Is it possible to rely on day after day...hell no!!!

If you think otherwise, do it 8 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 a year. Guaranteed anyone trying this will go broke!"

Jbjb, I'm going to agree with you and I'm sure Rob will also. You will go broke if you play -EV games 24/7. He doesn't. That's what win goals and loss limits are all about.

So, if you avoid the continuous play doesn't it become possible to bank just 4% wins?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj for the umpteenth time Rob's system is not mathematically flawed because he makes no mathematical claims. Are you listening?

His entire system is based on having a big bankroll and stopping with a relatively small profit.

Do you still follow?

If he's lucky he'll hit some big winner at $1 video poker. But if he doesn't he'll use that big bankroll to move up as high as $25 or even $100 per coin VP.

What you refuse to grasp is that Rob considers the winning session to be over once he has a profit of only $2500 on a $57,000 bankroll. That's only a return of about 4-percent.

Yes, with a $57,000 bankroll playing 8/5 Bonus Poker (his MAIN game) you can at some point have a profit of 4-percent. If you ignore all of the other side talk I think even you kewlj can accept the very real possibility of a 4% gain on a $57,000 bankroll.

---

Is it possible here and there...yes.

Is it possible to rely on day after day...hell no!!!

If you think otherwise, do it 8 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 a year. Guaranteed anyone trying this will go broke!

---

Once again jbjb, I made $984,000 doing it for nearly ten years. And guess what? The high probability of winning the first session was the same for session #56, #185, #277 etc. Then guess what? The BIG winners far outnumbered the very few big losers. Just as the math dictates. Is this possible using mostly 99% games? Of course it is....if you start at the lowest denom. every time you play a session!

But how silly is this premise....all you AP's would be absolutely gushing had I said I only played in situations where I created "positive plays" of 101% out of these 99% games, by adding in slot club fluff. Well, to add insult to injury, I did get alot of that stuff, but I never use it when machine results are the only thing that matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Honestly, not being a person who gets some kind of thrill in having action (degenerate gambler), I often wondered how the casino industry could pull it off for so long. I mean there is mathematical knowledge and proof out there, easily attainable. I always wondered how this math, some how eluded the degenerate gamblers? :confused:

Now I know. It is the old "lead a horse to water, but can't make him drink" scenario. Some of the degenerate gamblers on this site, have been lucky enough to have math guys, much smarter than me (I just use the math), explain it to them over and over and OVER, and have endured all the insults and name calling and still the degenerate gamblers insist the earth is FLAT! And they remain angry, bitter and broke because they refuse to learn.

No more for me. I am done. I really am. This site is the pure definition of insanity. Over and over and over we go. :(

---

Yawn....it's deja vu all over again. Jumping up and down screaming like a crying baby because the poor little kew can't get his way or accept the facts.

Go see shack!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Jbjb, I'm going to agree with you and I'm sure Rob will also. You will go broke if you play -EV games 24/7. He doesn't. That's what win goals and loss limits are all about.

---

The only way I or anyone similarly competent could win playing 99% games 24/7 is if I were to play one session after the other after the other after the other nonstop. And by the way, that's also the only way I or anyone similarly competent could win playing 101% games 24/7.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Go see shack!

---

Good movie. Can you imagine if he could've made free throws?


KJ went to bold black ink. a/ka Tarzan :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Go see shack!

---

Good movie. Can you imagine if he could've made free throws?


KJ went to bold black ink. a/ka Tarzan :cool:

---

At least we weren't treated to him reaching into his OTHER pocket :)

Hi kew! Tough for you to stay away, eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Exactly as I've said Alan. The doofus is so invested into the making up of his "+EV bj pro" virtual reality internet forum life, that he is far too afraid to even begin to address the inconsistencies about individual session probability magically changing out of thin air.

Maybe his TV went on the blink? :)

---

There you go projecting again. TV's now days just go out without warning. You would know this if you had something that wasn't a giant box filled with tubes.

Good point. Remember those old TVs when the vertical hold would go out of whack and you'd adjust be smacking on the side? Or better yet, get your kids to stand on hold the aluminum foil to the rabbit ears a certain way.

Just ignore Rob. Practically everyone else in the gambling world does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Just ignore Rob. Practically everyone else in the gambling world does.

---

Really?

What makes more sense: someone using $57,000 to win $2500 and calling it a success....

Or...

Someone losing $29,000 in a week but claiming to have been +EV the entire time?

LOL

As we've seen here, on WoV, LVA, and others, practically nobody ignores me....including the inimitable RS__. :)

I would guess that the phantom bucks "accumulation" is about as good as it gets for these anonymous armchair gamblers. Any wonder why they tremble at the thought of having their real names known?