The Forum Quandary

Basically, with Rob providing voiceover work for this forum, readers are faced with a quandary.

If someone wins the lottery, and then explains his or her strategy for winning the lottery, should you follow that strategy? That's basically what we're talking about here.

If professional mathematicians say that the strategy has no effect on future results, should you dismiss the professional mathematicians as theorists?

People can choose to believe whatever they choose to believe. The problem lies in beliefs being presented as facts.

What I would recommend is that Rob preface his statements with something similar to the anecdotal commercials for various medications. You know, where people say, "Xeralto has worked for me, and I believe it will work for you." No statement of fact regarding efficacy going forward or efficacy for other people, just a statement of personal history followed by personal belief.

If it were legal to write those commercials otherwise, the great corporations of this country would be doing exactly that.

I don't think any medication commercial uses the phrase "and I believe it will work for you."
I think the proper and conventional statement is something like "ask your doctor."

There is nothing wrong with Rob telling what worked for him.

What I have a problem with is people claiming to have won in casinos using secret information. Anyone's secret is not going to help anyone else so why bother posting? Rob's advice and strategy is in the open so everyone has a chance to look at it and decide for themselves if they want to try it.
I can't possibly try a strategy involving a dealer who accidentally flashes hole cards at an unidentified casino.

There is nothing wrong with Rob telling what worked for him. You are absolutely correct. But you seem to have conveniently not addressed my concern. What is wrong is his telling others it will work for them. That is a whole different animal.

Rob's recommendations should be tempered with the information that what he is saying is his personal history and personal belief, not a statement of fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I don't think any medication commercial uses the phrase "and I believe it will work for you."
I think the proper and conventional statement is something like "ask your doctor."

There is nothing wrong with Rob telling what worked for him.

What I have a problem with is people claiming to have won in casinos using secret information. Anyone's secret is not going to help anyone else so why bother posting? Rob's advice and strategy is in the open so everyone has a chance to look at it and decide for themselves if they want to try it.
I can't possibly try a strategy involving a dealer who accidentally flashes hole cards at an unidentified casino.

---

Completely different cases. His strategy has never been proven to work for him or anyone else. As for HC play, that HAS been proven to work for ANYONE, including you, and is NOT a secret. Deal cards at home for yourself and see. The only secrets are the locations where to play them at. Completely different set of circumstances. I agree with Red.

Hole carding is strictly accidental and unintentional. There is no sway to work it into a strategy unless you knew of an incompetent dealer at a casino with lax security and lax game protection or the dealer is a cooperative thief. Hole carding is not a routine workable strategy. Good luck to you if you can take advantage of this flaw.

Rob's strategy of win goals is a methodology everyone with common sense can use. Having loss limits and stop losses are also strategies anyone can use.

There is no way to dispute a profit. Win goals need not be proven as they speak for themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

There is nothing wrong with Rob telling what worked for him. You are absolutely correct. But you seem to have conveniently not addressed my concern. What is wrong is his telling others it will work for them. That is a whole different animal.

Rob's recommendations should be tempered with the information that what he is saying is his personal history and personal belief, not a statement of fact.

---

I'm not sure a disclaimer is needed. I think everyone reading his reports understands that they need to consider the variables in all gambling.

And how much are you ahead lifetime using "goals"? By your own admittance, you're not and you never will be.

JB
And how much are you ahead lifetime?....Don't bother, I won't believe you anyway.;)

I'm actually way ahead playing video poker. It's craps that killed me. It's amazing the difference a $100,000 royal can make for a regular $5 video poker player.

If I hadn't been greedy that day I was playing $25 video poker I would have walked with a profit of only about $7,000 which would have been a normal win goal.

Alan, hole card strategies exist. You post in a similar matter-of-fact way as Rob, as if what you say is undeniable truth.

I'd be interested in hearing how Rob generated his SPS or ARTT strategies. If I remember correctly, he said he used software for it, WinPoker or Video Poker for Winners. If that's the case, then surely Rob has the numbers for his strategy -- how frequency of him reaching his win goal at the lowest denom on the first game type...the frequency of advancing to each following level...how frequently he'll win a session vs lose the entire amount, average win.....etc. I'm not talking about what his records or actual results are. I'm talking the math he did (I assume he did math to come up with his strategy) in order to figure out it's a "winning" system.

That's news to me. Rob has never said here that he used software to come up with his strategies. He has studiously avoided saying that, in fact.

Perhaps I'm mistaken or thinking of someone/something else....but I'm almost certain I read that somewhere!

Of course hole card strategies exist... for when you can see the hole card.

Rob said something about having mathematicians back him up. He would need to explain.

All these theories. Some would say it's enuf to make heads spin.

Red, what I've told the many who've asked is that if they were to play EXACTLY the way my strategy is structured with the proper/required bankroll, and if they have the DISCIPLINE & DETERMINATION to always do what they said they were going to do before going into the casinos, then they would win at the same rate that I do and have. I have never blindly told anyone that they could win with a hit & run style without structure. The big problem with these "professional mathematicians" as you call them as they diss what I do is two-fold: first, let's use the Wizard as an example. You'd call him a professional mathematician, right? Well, similar to other "professionals" in his field, such a personality would first ACT professional by wanting to UNDERSTAND the strategy instead of simply theorizing about generalities about it. This is something none of them have ever done. And secondly, what constitutes a "professional mathematician"? I know this is from long ago, but as an EE with an MBA, I have probably more actuary & math background than all or most of my critics. The fact that I don't sit here and analyze everything that comes down the pike like arci and others of his ilk might do is simply a product of my being in upper management most of my career, and I learned how to think & reason problems out while leaving the numbers crunching to my teams. So when you assert that these "professionals" should not be dismissed as mere theorists, I'd be inclined to agree with you had any of them ever took the time to 100% understand what I've developed. As I've said, they feel much more at ease quoting book theory and criticizing than putting in the effort trying to understand how a human mind had the ability to develop such a strategy.

I'll explain about the 3 mathematicians again Alan because it's been a while. I developed the strategy, I gave it to 3 friends who were employed in the mathematics field to review & comment, and I finalized my strategy based on what my mind told me were the best points of all our input. You've seen the EV trade-offs I use in my special plays. These guys helped in the risk analyses of those and others that did not make the cut. They assisted in supporting my calculations about what big hits were worth in expectation the more hands I played into the strategy. Other aspects of it like this. This is just SPS. My other strategies (RTT, ARTT, Five-Play, & Multi-Strike) were developed by myself only, and are the only ones I now use.

The bottom line here is one would need to understand something completely if they wanted to intelligently comment on it. Simply saying it's "Martingale" or "a loser because only -EV games are played" is careless and amateurish at best. And even what you're saying Red, that mathematicians don't believe in it is misguided, because none of them fully understand all of it. There's been opportunities for sure. I had hoped the Wizard and his crew of geniuses would face me in LV on it, but when it got real and close they ran. I had a lot of faith that Frank Kneeland would get involved just as he said he would, but he suddenly disappeared.

And to Alan's point about these anonymous posters who claim crazy things yet don't even say where, when, how or why, because they're the "pro's pros" or something similarly lame. None of what they say is real, obviously. It's so easy to see how the questions Alan's asked them are easily answerable, yet they didn't write their stories that far in advance. They're only here because I've irritated them with the truth elsewhere and they're trying to glean info from me for themselves in their own private ways. I've seen it many times before. They know that success in gambling requires a solid education first.

I sure as hell don't want any of your info or strategies. I'd lose all my money.

The one thing we know for sure is that Singer constantly lies. Hence, absolutely nothing he says can be trusted.

Win goals/loss limits are fine for those playing negative games if it makes them feel better. They provide no help in improving long term results. People who claim otherwise are spewing mathematically illiterate nonsense.

I think Rob just wanted to come up with a "winning" strategy to show AP doesn't work. After all, he was humiliated before when he tried and failed at AP.

I've only heard it, but am not sure -- is it true you (Rob) filed bankruptcy due to your attempted AP failure?

I filed bankruptcy in 1996, not because of failed AP play that cost me on avg. about $45k/year. It wasn't a lot compared to my income, but something else much bigger got in the way and gambling losses didn't help. Upon discharge and due to the very liberal rules that used to be in place, we came out of it financially better than we went in. So it turned out to be a tool of wealth-building, as neither of our substantial 401k's were allowed to be touched back then. All this was explained in detail on my site for over 10 years.

As for arci and his constant lies, well, I'd say he's paid dearly for them if you believe in karma. In fact, every time I read one of his posts, I think about his hurt and I LMAO! It has truly turned out to be one of the most deserving fates for a forum bully that's ever been seen. God bless America!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

I sure as hell don't want any of your info or strategies. I'd lose all my money.

---

The info you provide (particularly, team type play) doesn't point to you having very much money, so the strategy would be out of your reach anyway. That's why you make up all this stuff about "fantastic edges" and "super secret plays" that you're only allowed to "tease" about. It's story-telling right out of the Wizard's forum at it's finest.

BTW, one thing I found out about "team" players like Frank Kneeland, Tom Robertson, etc., is that on top of them not having any retirement to look forward to, all they have in real time is money problems with other gamblers. Quite the slug-life.

When you think about it, quitting when ahead is a true positive expectation strategy. You can never lose money if you always quit a session when showing a profit.

Once again ask yourself: in what percentage of the DAYS that I gambled was I ahead by at least one bet? (Of course if you are making only a single bet or a small number of bets such as in sports or poker tournament this will not apply.) I think that almost every video poker or craps player or blackjack player can say that at some point they were ahead a large percentage of gambling days. I know I have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

The info you provide (particularly, team type play) doesn't point to you having very much money, so the strategy would be out of your reach anyway. That's why you make up all this stuff about "fantastic edges" and "super secret plays" that you're only allowed to "tease" about. It's story-telling right out of the Wizard's forum at it's finest.

BTW, one thing I found out about "team" players like Frank Kneeland, Tom Robertson, etc., is that on top of them not having any retirement to look forward to, all they have in real time is money problems with other gamblers. Quite the slug-life.

---

Team play is NOT 100% because of money. There are many factors as to why being on a team is good, mostly because you share information with each other. If I know of a good play in Washington and another one in Arizona that are happening at the same time, I can't take advantage of both. And if I don't know of any good plays to do right now, then I can't take advantage of anything. But if I'm teamed up with 2 or 3 other guys, sometimes I'll be providing more information so that I can go play in WA and someone else go play in AZ. Once those plays finish, I may not discover anything, while a teammate discovers something. Also, many plays (particularly HCing) require more than one person at a time to play properly. And of course, part of it is due to money as well. If I have a $50K bankroll, perhaps I can safely wager $500 a hand in game X, and make $1000/hour. If I teamed up with 3 other guys who each have a $50K bankroll, now I can play as if I had a $200K bankroll, and so can they. So now we can each wager $2000 a hand in game X and make $4000/hour.

There are things I've discovered and brought to my team and we've all made money on it. There are things they've brought to the table and we've all made money on it. If I wasn't part of the team, the others would not have made as much money (because they would not have been playing it / having action on the play)...and I wouldn't have made as much money either, because I wouldn't have been able to play it properly without others helping.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

When you think about it, quitting when ahead is a true positive expectation strategy. You can never lose money if you always quit a session when showing a profit.

Once again ask yourself: in what percentage of the DAYS that I gambled was I ahead by at least one bet? (Of course if you are making only a single bet or a small number of bets such as in sports or poker tournament this will not apply.) I think that almost every video poker or craps player or blackjack player can say that at some point they were ahead a large percentage of gambling days. I know I have.

---

But you'll have that rare session where you will NEVER be ahead at any point.

Alan, if you truly believe that quitting when ahead is positive expectation, then try this:
- Go to the casino, pick your game and start playing. As soon as you're ahead by any amount, cash out.
- Go to cashier/ATM machine, cash out the voucher.
- Take a lap around the parking lot [this is not necessary, actually].
- Sit back down at your machine and start a new session.
- Rinse, wash, repeat.

I hope you can see, you're not going to win money in the long term doing this. You may as well just sit at the machine and play for as many hours as you can, because both are the same thing. I don't actually advise you to do this.

I don't know if "rinse, wash, repeat" will necessarily work. My experience has been (with only two exceptions) that I will have one big winner per session. That big winner might be quad aces or it might be a royal. Or it might be a couple of quads that come quickly.

Only twice in more than 15 years of playing video poker have I hit two royals in the same weekend -- and never have I hit two royals in the same day.

THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT about playing with win goals is to also have a LOSS LIMIT. It makes no sense to leave with a win goal if on other visits you let yourself lose too much money.

I want to tell you why I turned very sour on "team play."

Frank Kneeland, who was perhaps the poster boy for team play, admitted to me and to Jason when we took him for lunch at Caesars, that he never played with his own money. Jason and I looked at each other in disbelief and shock, and questioned Frank about that. He told us he would never gamble with his own money, and he wouldn't play unless he was using someone else's money. And this was the poster boy for team play? This was the renowned author for team play strategy?

After I posted what Frank told me and it was questioned on various forums (he let the cat out of the bag at our lunch) he willingly admitted it to the world. That's when Rob found out about it and Rob and I in a phone conversation both expressed our shock. That's when my BS meter broke -- it was a magnitude 20 on an earthquake scale that maxed out at 10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I want to tell you why I turned very sour on "team play."

Frank Kneeland, who was perhaps the poster boy for team play, admitted to me and to Jason when we took him for lunch at Caesars, that he never played with his own money. Jason and I looked at each other in disbelief and shock, and questioned Frank about that. He told us he would never gamble with his own money, and he wouldn't play unless he was using someone else's money. And this was the poster boy for team play? This was the renowned author for team play strategy?

After I posted what Frank told me and it was questioned on various forums (he let the cat out of the bag at our lunch) he willingly admitted it to the world. That's when Rob found out about it and Rob and I in a phone conversation both expressed our shock. That's when my BS meter broke -- it was a magnitude 20 on an earthquake scale that maxed out at 10.

---

I guess your experience (through Frank) is significantly different than my experience, regarding team play. I've almost always used my own money when playing, either it being 100% my own money, or pooled with others (and of course, I'd get a fair cut of the win/loss). I have very occasionally played using only someone else's money where it wouldn't matter to me if I won or lost, because I'd be getting paid the same amount regardless of a win or loss.

Frank said something about being paid an hourly rate plus a bonus if the team hit the big royal. He also said something about playing slot progressives but that was in a conversation at our lunch and I don't think he posted about that much publicly.

Tell us, Alan, what part of Frank's play tells us anything at all about VP math? From what I could gather he simply found people were willing to pay him for doing what he would have done otherwise. This probably reduced his overall profits but eliminated the risk. A simple trade-off. Why you thought this was meaningful is beyond me. People do this all the time in other areas. The ones that take the risks are called entrepreneurs. They are also the ones that often get filthy rich.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

When you think about it, quitting when ahead is a true positive expectation strategy. You can never lose money if you always quit a session when showing a profit.

Once again ask yourself: in what percentage of the DAYS that I gambled was I ahead by at least one bet? (Of course if you are making only a single bet or a small number of bets such as in sports or poker tournament this will not apply.) I think that almost every video poker or craps player or blackjack player can say that at some point they were ahead a large percentage of gambling days. I know I have.

---

Alan, we went through this before. I explained that you will win up to 95% of the time with this strategy but still lose on negative games. I even built a simulation and produced the actual numbers. Now, here you are again repeating this still drivel that only makes it obvious you are a poor thinker.

Arc I answered this in the thread about quitting when ahead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Arc I answered this in the thread about quitting when ahead.

---

No Alan, all you did is repeat the same illogical buffoonery.

I dont use team play for vp. My vp play is very few and far between. Team play on blackjack or carnival poker based card games is absolutely necessary to avoid or severely limit detection. The fact that none of you are table games players shows me that none of you understand that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

I dont use team play for vp. My vp play is very few and far between. Team play on blackjack or carnival poker based card games is absolutely necessary to avoid or severely limit detection. The fact that none of you are table games players shows me that none of you understand that.

---

That says it all right there, only you don't see that it cuts both ways. I among others here have little knowledge of what team entails, aside from it not being for me because I have the money to go it alone.

OTOH, you have basically zero knowledge of how I do what I do, yet you want to sound like an authority by criticizing it. I hope you finally see why your overall credibility is of little value here. And making up silly claims while hiding your identity as well as any supporting information about it hasn't helped your image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

I guess your experience (through Frank) is significantly different than my experience, regarding team play. I've almost always used my own money when playing, either it being 100% my own money, or pooled with others (and of course, I'd get a fair cut of the win/loss). I have very occasionally played using only someone else's money where it wouldn't matter to me if I won or lost, because I'd be getting paid the same amount regardless of a win or loss.

---

You need to read Frank's book. He's been acclaimed as being the #1 authority on team play. If you're doing things differently than him then you have a lot to learn.

There's three distinct reasons why anyone would want to be involved in such a dumb aspect of gambling. First, the feel-good/self-confidence building excuse you mentioned of not being able to be at two places at once. You claim that you could "make X amount per hour here and Y amount per hour there" only you make ZERO PER HOUR if the team fails to hit the royal. No theory--just reality.

Secondly, you people all do this because you can't afford to go it alone, and if you can't afford something you shouldn't be doing it. As I said, you people are gamblers, and gamblers get into it with each other over money all the time. Ask Tom Robertson....and Frank if he's still alive. Third, most casinos do not allow team vp play any longer. I suspect that's why you make up so many stories that just can't be identified or explained past the "trust me" phase. You live in a world of theory, so much so that when you theorize about gambling "opportunities" you create a partial, real live story about it. Kinda like all the phony stories that mickeycrimm comes up with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

You need to read Frank's book. He's been acclaimed as being the #1 authority on team play. If you're doing things differently than him then you have a lot to learn.

There's three distinct reasons why anyone would want to be involved in such a dumb aspect of gambling. First, the feel-good/self-confidence building excuse you mentioned of not being able to be at two places at once. You claim that you could "make X amount per hour here and Y amount per hour there" only you make ZERO PER HOUR if the team fails to hit the royal. No theory--just reality.

Secondly, you people all do this because you can't afford to go it alone, and if you can't afford something you shouldn't be doing it. As I said, you people are gamblers, and gamblers get into it with each other over money all the time. Ask Tom Robertson....and Frank if he's still alive. Third, most casinos do not allow team vp play any longer. I suspect that's why you make up so many stories that just can't be identified or explained past the "trust me" phase. You live in a world of theory, so much so that when you theorize about gambling "opportunities" you create a partial, real live story about it. Kinda like all the phony stories that mickeycrimm comes up with.

---

Excellent post Rob. Your posts are always a hoot to read! :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Excellent post Rob. Your posts are always a hoot to read! :eek:

---

Agreed. Just shows how illiterate he is. I've said many times that we use team play on tables to avoid detection. And it actually nets us MORE money than a lone wolf player. I guess Bob Nersesian is a phoney too.

I don't think there's anything wrong with team play. I just think it's ironic that the great expert on team play never used his own money and said he wouldn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Agreed. Just shows how illiterate he is. I've said many times that we use team play on tables to avoid detection. And it actually nets us MORE money than a lone wolf player. I guess Bob Nersesian is a phoney too.

---

Right. You want to "avoid detection" at table games, then you want to come on here and constantly talk about winning by doing it without any type of info, support, or proof, and then you get irritated when people ask you questions about it in order to help with your credibility. And this has to be a dream tag-line: "it actually nets us MORE money than a lone wolf player". So here's some more tough questions: how, and why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Right. You want to "avoid detection" at table games, then you want to come on here and constantly talk about winning by doing it without any type of info, support, or proof, and then you get irritated when people ask you questions about it in order to help with your credibility. And this has to be a dream tag-line: "it actually nets us MORE money than a lone wolf player". So here's some more tough questions: how, and why?

---

Try reading my posts above. You might actually learn something.

You have yet to answer one question with a real answer. It's always a convoluted array of guessing games and unobtainable clearances required first.

Wise up.

The only question(s) you wrote are "how and why?"

How many AP's does it take to screw in a light bulb? One to call himself Wizard, and another 20 cheerleaders - aka dealers, consultants, game inventors and other lottery-type gullibles - to keep it up with the not-so-bright ideas.

Pro-gambling (AP ads and infomercials for online casinos) isn't quite the same as professional gambling, but at least it's the lowest form of living.