Big Point: Rob Singer Isn't real

[redietz]

I make this point in another thread, but I'll repeat it here. "Rob Singer" is a fictional character. We are wasting time and energy because criticizing "Rob Singer" is like criticizing Lex Luthor. He doesn't exist. Whatever he says isn't going to stain Rob Argentino or Alan Mendelson because it's under a pseudonym that isn't legally or morally responsible to anyone.

Maybe it's a way for Rob Argentino to turn into Mr. Hyde and blow off steam and allow every nasty narcissistic element of himself some hours in the sun. Who knows? It's not a bad idea if, as Charlie Sheen, you're having anger issues.The point is -- Argentino is probably chuckling every time people go off on his fictional creation -- and maybe every time Alan defends his fictional creation.

Alan presumably knows he's not responsible in any way for what this fictional creation says. Argentino is writing a script and presenting it in this forum. Let him do it.

It may be helpful ethically if not necessary legally, to simply state at the top of the LV Forum that Rob Singer is a fictional character and none of his claims have been independently verified or are promoted/condoned by this forum. Then let him say whatever however he wants.

Problem solved.

[Count Room]

So if you accuse a fictional character of running a scam, it isn't libel at that point?

EDIT: And when I say "you" I don't mean you, Redietz; this was a general question.

[regnis]

Good point Red--except for 1 problem. Let's say that you said Tom Cruise was a bad actor or that he was gay. While truth is a defense, we are not sure of either. Now, since Tom Cruise is, similar to Singer, a fictional character, his real name being Thomas Cruise Mapother IV, my research indicates that you still would have libeled him.

So Count Room---careful--it's still libel. I'm not sure if it would be libel if you said Bugs Bunny were gay.

[Alan Mendelson]

I have this question: can you libel a business? And isn't the pen name of an author a business name and a business?

[quahaug]

Good point Red--except for 1 problem. Let's say that you said Tom Cruise was a bad actor or that he was gay. While truth is a defense, we are not sure of either. Now, since Tom Cruise is, similar to Singer, a fictional character, his real name being Thomas Cruise Mapother IV, my research indicates that you still would have libeled him.

So Count Room---careful--it's still libel. I'm not sure if it would be libel if you said Bugs Bunny were gay.

Bugs is gay? Say it ain't so!

[redietz]

My point has nothing to do with libel. I'm saying that Mr. Argentino can lie through his teeth as "Rob Singer" and no one can touch him.

The libel question hinges on whether Mr. Argentino ever registered the name Rob Singer as a business moniker. I would say that's odds against.

[Alan Mendelson]

My point has nothing to do with libel. I'm saying that Mr. Argentino can lie through his teeth as "Rob Singer" and no one can touch him.

I think you are overlooking several things.

First, someone puts a value on their professional reputation even if it is a pen name. And while it is a pen name, there is a person who publicly uses that pen name. You have to also keep in mind that he has books on the market using that pen name and you could be causing damage to the publisher as well as to the author and his business interests.

Second, use of a pen name -- to answer your comment directly -- doesn't give anyone a license to lie, slur, slander or libel. In some cases -- and this goes for those in the media and in show business -- sometimes a pen name is an alternate name used for marketing purposes. If you were to make disparaging comments about someone using that pen name would your comments be excused? If an actor makes disparaging comments about someone else should he be excused because his "movie name" is not his real name?

No, I don't think the fact that someone uses a "pen name" gives anyone the right or the excuse to make false or damaging comments against them, nor does it allow that person to make false or damaging comment against someone else.

Let me take this to an extreme example: Would you excuse someone who threatened to assassinate a public official if the threat letter were signed "Tom the Clown"??

[redietz]

So, Alan, are you saying you believe the poster known as "Rob Singer" hasn't lied on this forum?

I thought in another thread you were making light of the fact he appeared to misrepresent how many hands of video poker he had played to arrive at x number of royals. Is that a big deal? Does it matter?

I actually won 17 consecutive wagers in 2011. Does it matter if I claimed I had won 67 consecutive wagers? Or am I to be judged differently than "Rob Singer?"

[Alan Mendelson]

So, Alan, are you saying you believe the poster known as "Rob Singer" hasn't lied on this forum?

He may well have lied. I don't know.

I think he should explain what has been alleged about the number of hands he has played and his "win frequency" if I can use that term. Frankly, it doesnt matter to me if he played 3,500 hands between royals or 200,000 hands between royals. It would matter to me if he didn't win a million dollars. But his wins were published before in Gaming Today and as I've said winning $100,000 per year playing $10 and $25 isn't really that big a feat because I know others players who have won that much.

And when Arc can win "five figures" playing $1 and lower denominations of VP why couldn't someone win six-figures playing $10 and $25 VP??

Come to think of it, there is another question that should be asked: Does Rob Singer really use his special plays 5% of the time? What if he uses special plays only 1% of the time, or even less than 1% of the time? What if he manufactured the special plays to make himself stand out when he plays video poker for the most part just like the rest of us play? Has anyone ever watched him long enough to determine he uses his special plays 5% of the time?

[Vegas_lover]

He may well have lied. I don't know.

I think he should explain what has been alleged about the number of hands he has played and his "win frequency" if I can use that term.

But his wins were published before in Gaming Today and as I've said winning $100,000 per year playing $10 and $25 isn't really that big a feat because I know others players who have won that much.

Of course Rob didn't lie. Rob is not like that. Redietz, you calling Rob a lier? Shame on you

Rob didn't lie, he just guessed a lot. He has already said that but I guess you missed that one Alan. He developed his strategy with the greatest detail, turned professional and after he started playing as a professional it just turned into one big guess. Nothing special guys, that happens all the time. Right?

And all his publications with numbers of hands played, jackpots won, inserted coin, etc. They were just insignificant typos. You folks just don't get it

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob said from the beginning that it would be impossible for anyone to duplicate the execution of his strategy because when to use the "special plays" had too many variables. This is why I personally have downplayed the significance of his special plays and why I am most interested in his win goal system of "quitting when ahead instead of giving it back."

Of everything Rob has talked about, it is his win goal system which to me makes the most sense and is the most compelling part of his strategy.

His special plays? How many times in a session are you dealt a straight with four to a straight flush? How many times does that happen in a year?
How many times are you dealt three aces with a kicker in Triple Double Bonus? I've been playing that game for more than 7 years -- it happened to me once.

[Vegas_lover]

Rob said from the beginning that it would be impossible for anyone to duplicate the execution of his strategy because when to use the "special plays" had too many variables.

That was a very smart move of him. It made it impossible for others to really, really get to the bottom of his strategy. On the other hand, for some with enough knowlegde about math and vp this was an important indication that his strategy wasn't exactly, well, you know.

[Vegas_lover]

Of everything Rob has talked about, it is his win goal system which to me makes the most sense and is the most compelling part of his strategy.

Are you telling us you needed to invest all this time and energy into Rob's 'system' to get some discipline? Interesting.

[Alan Mendelson]

Vegas+lover I think you should ask the APs about "quitting when ahead" and what they say about it? I defer to Arcimedes and the others to expand on this.

I am just curious though-- do you use win goals when you play?

[Vegas_lover]

I am just curious though-- do you use win goals when you play?

I have a very interesting strategy involving win goals and loss limits. Actually I think it's the best strategy out there. Maybe we should sit down, discuss it so you could shoot a series of videos and publish them on your website?

It took me years to develop my strategy and I've thought about the smallest details. It really is an exciting strategy. My system involves a win goal of 25 million dollars and my loss limit is based on the amount of shirts I lose. Do I lose my shirt once, twice or more

Sorry Alan, I'm just pulling your leg. This is all just getting way too funny.

[Alan Mendelson]

It is very funny. Well written satire, too. But do you use a win goal? And if so how do you set your win goal and why do you use one?

[Vegas_lover]

It is very funny. Well written satire, too. But do you use a win goal? And if so how do you set your win goal and why do you use one?

I only have a loss limit because I always expect my money to be gone at the end of the gambling session. It's part of my vacation budget and although I prefer to win, I don't really care if I lose. As long as I had my fair share of cocktails, chatted with some nice people and enjoyed the people watching it's all good. I am one of those people Rob claims don't excist. I look at my gambling money as entertainment money. One night I spend it on a nice dinner and a great show, the other night I throw it away at the tables or play some live poker.

But when I do get on a hot streak I will count my winnings regularly and decide at what level I will cash out. In other words, I won't give it all back. How have I done over time? I've got no idea. If had trips where I won $10,000 + and I've had trips where I lost 10,000+. But what I do know, everytime I won I paid the wife tax at an increasing rate. But more important than winning or losing money during Vegas vacations, I've met some wonderful people over there who became very dear friends. We still talk to eachother every week and meet eachother whenever we're in Vegas. That's what really matters, no win goal or loss limit can top that.

[Vegas Vic]

Rob said from the beginning that it would be impossible for anyone to duplicate the execution of his strategy because when to use the "special plays" had too many variables.

(I see where VL highlighted your statement earlier.) I brought up this topic with Rob sometime ago in another thread and asked for a "summary of special plays" in the likelihood that one of us could make an attempt at putting them to use rather than just reading about them and nothing as been forthcoming. If they are located in one of his books, I even offered to purchase one, and I'd do my own research. Again, nothing. Perhaps it's too risky to write these things down (as: "with this hand, in this game, you do this") lest the possibility we find fallacy in those plays. Leaving it all so generic ("too many variables") makes me think that someone is all foam and no beer.

[Alan Mendelson]

Vegas Vic, have you seen the videos here? http://www.alanbestbuys.com/id194.html This are the examples Rob gave me to illustrate his special plays. He selected these as representative of the ones most commonly used. He says there are literally hundreds of variations of these... but I didn't get into the details of that. You don't have to buy anything... the special plays are here with the expected value of the conventional play and the special play and why Rob makes each special play.

Please read them... it's what I've been crucified for posting.

[Vegas_lover]

(I see where VL highlighted your statement earlier.) I brought up this topic with Rob sometime ago in another thread and asked for a "summary of special plays" in the likelihood that one of us could make an attempt at putting them to use rather than just reading about them and nothing as been forthcoming. If they are located in one of his books, I even offered to purchase one, and I'd do my own research. Again, nothing. Perhaps it's too risky to write these things down (as: "with this hand, in this game, you do this") lest the possibility we find fallacy in those plays. Leaving it all so generic ("too many variables") makes me think that someone is all foam and no beer.

Exactly, and since he says there are literally hundreds of variations of these...even more foam and even less beer