An open invitation to Frank Kneeland

On the LVA message board, video poker author Frank Kneeland has indicated that he is interested in reviewing Rob Singer's video poker strategy and system. Frank is well respected in the VP community. If Frank would be so gracious I am willing to meet him at his convenience in Vegas (where he lives) to offer him the opportunity to discuss his review and to present his findings in a full, unedited video interview. I will also put the full, unedited interview on YouTube so that everyone will have full, unrestricted access to it, including the ability to post the video on their own websites. I will also present the video here.

I did try to contact Frank through his website, but I could not find a "contact" page to send an email. I no longer post on the LVA Forum and if anyone wants to extend this invitation there it is OK with me and would be appreciated.

It has always been my goal to allow full and open discussions of controversial issues as long as those discussions are done with respect and decency. I don't "have a dog in this fight."

Thanks, Alan

My offer is also open to other video poker professionals and authors including Bob Dancer, and those of you who know these gentlemen please let them know.

Thank you.

I am happy to report that Frank responded favorably to my invitation that I posted on the LVA message board. He said in his response that he is preparing for the evaluation of Rob Singer's system and he is happy to participate in a video taped interview. He asked that I contact him in about four weeks, which would be about mid-August.

I want to say on the record that the video taped interview will be presented unedited, and I am giving Frank 100% freedom to state his evaluation. My role in the interview will be only to be sure that Frank's comments will be understood by a general audience interested in video poker. If he starts using terms that are "too technical" or terms not familiar to the general public, my role will be to ask him to explain or clarify. At no time will I try to steer the direction or his opinion.

And I again extend the similar invitation to Bob Dancer who, I've been told, already has his mind made up about Rob Singer's system. If Bob is willing to talk about it in an unedited video format, I'll be there to conduct the interview at his convenience.

I can understand Dancer not taking the invitation. What's to gain for him? The only thing that will happen for sure is another Dancer-Singer battle. I also believe that Frank Kneeland's analysis won't change very much whatever the outcome will be.... People believe what they want to believe even if it seems "to good to be true". Most of the time when something seems to good to be true it is exactly that. But still 1000's of people buy into to good to be true stories everyday because of the "what if question"...

Even if Frank Kneeland's conclusion is that SPS doesn't work there will still be 1000's of people out there not knowing who Frank Kneeland is, stumble over Singer on the internet, read his stories, watch his internet videos and think "this man is a genius, he cracked the system....."

And another thing I'm certain of is the following: if Kneeland's conclusion is that SPS doesn't work I'm sure Singer will jump back in to state that Kneeland doesn't understand his system and can't grasp the complex math involved or that he missed crucial parts in his research. And then.......we'll be back to square one.

I do have a question for you Alan. What will your position be on SPS if Kneeland concludes the system doesn't work? What will happen to the videos you put up your website about SPS? How will that affect your relationship with Singer?

"I again extend the similar invitation to Bob Dancer who, I've been told, already has his mind made up about Rob Singer's system."

Why would anyone with any math background not have their mind made up? The system is a scam as I have demonstrated conclusively on this very forum. Frank will say it nicer, but his conclusion will be the same.

Sorry Alan, but the facts don't rely on opinions. They are just facts.

As for Singer, he's had his chance to reply to my evaluation and he has been completely silent. I suspect he's praying that Frank will find something good to say about his system. He knows in his gut that I completely obliterated his system in just an hour of analysis. He has no comeback because there is none. All I did is apply simple arithmetic to Singer's claims and found most of them to be void of logic.

Now, on top of this, Alan has not ask a single question about my evaluation himself. He either understands what I wrote and is trying to ignore it ... or, he doesn't want to understand it. Very interesting, indeed.

First, Arcimede$... you probably don't recall (but you can check) that on the LVA message board I also invited you to participate in a video interview. You still can. The invitation is still open. Let me know when you are in Vegas or if by chance you are visiting Southern California. I'm afraid that traveling to the Midwest is not possible for me. As this part of my work is "non revenue" (I don't make any money from it-- in fact it keeps me from my money-making activities).

And Vegas_Lover wrote: "I do have a question for you Alan. What will your position be on SPS if Kneeland concludes the system doesn't work? What will happen to the videos you put up your website about SPS? How will that affect your relationship with Singer?"

Let me answer the last part first? I have no relationship with Mr. Singer. I contacted him because I wanted to present his controversial ideas on my website. That was my idea and goal. He was gracious enough to make the trips to Vegas to do the interviews-- and yes, I'm sure he had other reasons to also make his trips. I have spoken with Rob from time to time about the mechanics of "the challenge" if it were to happen, but it doesn't seem like it will. As I told Frank and as I've written here, I will present his complete, unedited video on YouTube and on my site and everyone else in the world will be able to see it and use it on their websites without restriction. On my site, it will go back-to-back with Mr. Singer's content. And if Arc also wants his content there, I will post it there too.

The Internet is "cheap." It costs me virtually nothing to present ideas and information on my site and on YouTube. Fortunately I have a cameraman and editor on staff, I own my high def camera and editing equipment. Use of the Internet is one of the miracles of our generation and lives now. So we should take advantage of it. It is the Internet that will bring about the new revolutions of social and political change. Let the world see, know and understand, and let people make up their own minds. Just as I let you gentlemen post your criticisms of Mr. Singer AND OF ME, I will keep Mr. Singer's comments on my site as a record of what he said-- and Mr. Kneeland's comments will be on my site as a record of what he said.

And remember this about the Internet: you can't unring a bell. Mr. Singer's videos have now been viewed many thousands of times not only on YouTube but on other sites that have used the YouTube videos.

Alan,

My questions to you in this thread were not about attacking you but just genuine interest in your position on SPS. I didn't know "how friendly" the two of you are/were because I simply didn't know if your contacts went further than only analysing SPS. I was just wondering what you would do with the outcome of Kneeland's research. Posting them back-to-back to the Singer video interviews would be a good approach. It gives people the opportunity to see "both sides" and make up their minds by themselves. As I said in a previous post, I'm not out to start a new storn so there's no need to defend yourself in reply to my post. My questions were not intended to attack you....

What's your opinion about the results that have been presented until now? Would it tempt you to use SPS more or less?

I said it a hundred times on the LVA board: I do NOT follow Singer's system with one exception: when dealt three aces with a kicker playing TDB I only hold the three aces.

Rob watched me play for about fifteen minutes before we did our second interview. He made two suggestions in about fifteen minutes. I did not follow them. And yes, I played with MY card in the machine. LOL

I added the following at 2:48pm, several hours after my original response:

I've said numerous times that I don't know all of Rob's strategy. In my interviews with him we mainly explored his "special plays." When I say I don't follow his special plays, I mean it-- I don't-- with the exception of holding three aces and dropping the kicker in triple double bonus. But what I still don't know about his strategy and system are other elements of it, including how and when he increases the denomination he plays. In a brief phone conversation Rob tried to explain it to me and that is when I offered him another opportunity for another video interview to explain that element of his strategy plus an overall look at how he plays.

There is one thing about Rob's system that I definitely approve of and that is his concept of setting a win goal and leaving when you hit that win goal. And that is something that even the "advantage players" should consider. The concept is simple-- when you reach a certain amount of profit you can pocket it and come back and play again another time. Some people just don't want to get up and leave when they reach a win goal early and you can't fault them for that. But had I followed this one element of Rob's play (quitting when ahead) I would be better off today. Sure there were time when I hit a big win and went on to win more, but there were more times that I hit a big win and then just gave it all back in the next few hours. As Rob might say there is nothing wrong with going home with some extra money in your pocket.

I took a look at the Las Vegas Advisor Forum and from some recent posts by Frank Kneeland it appears he is now reviewing Rob Singer's system. I look forward to the video interview that he has agreed to give me about his report on the Singer system. Right now, it appears that he is concerned about the use of certain terms and phrases and how they might be misunderstood.

I have to admit that I once was involved in a heated argument on the Web because I misunderstood how a certain phrase was being used. I was wrong-- and I know that now.

The discussion was about the "house advantage on the odds bet in craps."

The true definition of "house advantage" is different from the definition I was using. I defined "house advantage" as being the chance of winning.

So now, Frank is discussing how some terms used by Rob may be wrong and misinterpreted but when investigated the differences may not be so severe.

This will be interesting.

Updates will be posted. Thanks.

I got an update from Frank and he is at least a month away from doing the video interview with his comments on Rob's system.

In the meantime, I've been reading some of his "surveys" on the LVA board and it appears he is gathering info to help his review of Singer's system.

He has been asking questions about how to measure sessions, and how to report results from those sessions, and he's even asked questions about how people might be willing to accept changes about thoughts.

I have not discussed any of this with Frank, but it appears he is going to do an analysis which is not just about whether or not Rob's system can "work" or is beneficial, but he will also approach why certain beneficial parts of the system are not accepted.

Now, please don't tell me that Rob's entire system is worthless, because I will argue with you till eternity that there are some features of it that are very valuable including his concept of win goals and session limits.

By the way, when Frank was asking about how to report a win during a gambling day, I am surprised that none of the APers said that they don't measure wins or losses by the day since all VP play is just one continuous session. (Of course, the IRS wants to know about those session and annual wins and losses.)

I'm one of the AP crowd and even if no one else does, I measure my wins and losses on more than just a daily basis. For me, its never "one continuous session", but the gaming day can be made up of multiple sessions. Whenever I go to a casino, I have a daily budget which I adhere to, but each sit-down in the casino (and there will always be more than one) will have its own portion of the daily amount. That portion may vary depending on how many separate sessions I plan on having. I carry a small spiral notebook to track my + or - results for each session and when there is a winning session, those $$$ are not mingled with the aforementioned budgeted money but kept aside. At the end of the day, I may not be totally "a winner", but I am usually never totally "a loser" either.

If you don't mind revealing your actual budget, denomination of games played, stop loss, win goal, I think it would help everyone understand how this comes together.

I think an explanation of budget in terms of denomination played and the other factors can really help an understanding of the money management strategy you and others use.

Thanks.