Rob Singer sent me a trip report.

[a2a3dseddie]

Rob, casinos now all provide people with win-loss statements for the year at their request.

How about requesting these for all casinos you played significantly in 2013 and post them here?

Just a wild guess Dan, but I don't think he will.

[Rob.Singer]

but Rob, THAT is my entire point.

for someone who claims he wants to limit his time in the casino, and to hit a win goal, why do you insist on playing at lower levels? Why not just sit down at a ten dollar machine, hit some full houses or maybe a quad (using your special plays which help you make quads) and leave?

And when you say you never got to the $25 level, I'm sure that means you did play at the $5 and $10 levels.

If I simply sat down at a $10 machine without a strategy, instead of winning every year since my strategies began, I'd lose every or almost every year like you do. You keep trying to talk yourself and even me into believing that my strategy is a waste of time because you don't understand it--just like you've done with the special plays. That makes no sense, but I've tried.

And again, poor attentiveness. Lower denominations win 20% of the time and what's more (and I'm sure you'll never get this either) all the lower level cashouts make it much easier to attain a win goal if play needs to go to the highest level. Many times, just regular quads or several FH's and/or flushes allow a goal to be reached BECAUSE of the accumulated soft profit cash outs. Just admit this Alan: using any strategy that requires slowed play and constant thinking/calculations is not in your interest. It takes the point accumulation down a notch, and because of the "slowdown" that would mean a big hit on the craving factor for that next gratifying little winner.

[Rob.Singer]

Just a wild guess Dan, but I don't think he will.

And you're correct. Unless and until everyone who posts big winners here do it, I never will. How ignorant is that request anyway. I could obtain them, post them, and because they'll all show a good to fantastic amount of winnings, I'll immediately be accused of doctoring the forms since losers can't stomach what I've accomplished. That, my friends, warms my heart..

[Vegas_lover]

And you're correct. Unless and until everyone who posts big winners here do it, I never will. How ignorant is that request anyway. I could obtain them, post them, and because they'll all show a good to fantastic amount of winnings, I'll immediately be accused of doctoring the forms since losers can't stomach what I've accomplished. That, my friends, warms my heart..

But please do remember folks: all this talk about gambling isn't important to Rob anymore. He has more important things in life to look after

[arcimede$]

I got a big kick out of reading Robbie's silly excuses. Only in his feeble mind could he believe he will get away with "never" really means "sometimes".

Bwah haha haha haha haha haha

The video isn't the only place he has stated that he will "never" hold a kicker. He's said it in comments at various fora several times. And now he won't provide a copy of the casino win/loss statement. Good thing, because I would make sure to forward it to the IRS. Chuckle, chuckle. Only a fool would believe Robbie really hit this winner (sorry Alan).

[Alan Mendelson]

I changed my mind Rob. You'd reach your win goal faster at the $100 level.

I'm at Caesars waiting for Katy Perry. I am right at the stage.

[Count Room]

And you're correct. Unless and until everyone who posts big winners here do it, I never will. How ignorant is that request anyway. I could obtain them, post them, and because they'll all show a good to fantastic amount of winnings, I'll immediately be accused of doctoring the forms since losers can't stomach what I've accomplished. That, my friends, warms my heart..

Rob: The main reason people would want you to post win/loss statements is the fact that you are the only one in the entire group that claims that minus-EV VP games can be consistently beaten for a good amount of money. No one else is making this extraordinary claim. Dan's request is a very reasonable one and I have to concur with the old canard: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

I say this as someone who actually LIKES your SPS and I have had both good and bad years using different variations of it. In much the same vein as to how you responded to Dan's request, if a salesman cast aspersions upon a customer in a car dealership or an appliance store because the customer wanted to investigate the quality of a product more deeply the customer would have every legitimate reason in the world to be very suspicious and to wisely leave the premises immediately.

We know you are selling an idea without us paying actual money for it, but if you want more Singer converts then more hard evidence can go a long way towards that. If people who hate you still claim you falsified the win/loss statements, so what?? At least it would be a good start for the average neutral schmuck out there (such as myself and many other quiet forum lurkers).

[a2a3dseddie]

Rob: The main reason people would want you to post win/loss statements is the fact that you are the only one in the entire group that claims that minus-EV VP games can be consistently beaten for a good amount of money. No one else is making this extraordinary claim. Dan's request is a very reasonable one and I have to concur with the old canard: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

I say this as someone who actually LIKES your SPS and I have had both good and bad years using different variations of it. In much the same vein as to how you responded to Dan's request, if a salesman cast aspersions upon a customer in a car dealership or an appliance store because the customer wanted to investigate the quality of a product more deeply the customer would have every legitimate reason in the world to be very suspicious and to wisely leave the premises immediately.

We know you are selling an idea without us paying actual money for it, but if you want more Singer converts then more hard evidence can go a long way towards that. If people who hate you still claim you falsified the win/loss statements, so what?? At least it would be a good start for the average neutral schmuck out there (such as myself and many other quiet forum lurkers).

Well put Count. Count me in as a neutral schmuck.

[Rob.Singer]

I changed my mind Rob. You'd reach your win goal faster at the $100 level.

I'm at Caesars waiting for Katy Perry. I am right at the stage.

Gee, that's putting those thousands you paid for such special 7 Stars status to good use....

[Rob.Singer]

I got a big kick out of reading Robbie's silly excuses. Only in his feeble mind could he believe he will get away with "never" really means "sometimes".

Bwah haha haha haha haha haha

The video isn't the only place he has stated that he will "never" hold a kicker. He's said it in comments at various fora several times. And now he won't provide a copy of the casino win/loss statement. Good thing, because I would make sure to forward it to the IRS. Chuckle, chuckle. Only a fool would believe Robbie really hit this winner (sorry Alan).

Arci my friend....the only thing that lasts forever, and I say this with a heavy heart, is the type of pain you've got going on up there--along with knowing you caused it all.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob: The main reason people would want you to post win/loss statements is the fact that you are the only one in the entire group that claims that minus-EV VP games can be consistently beaten for a good amount of money. No one else is making this extraordinary claim. Dan's request is a very reasonable one and I have to concur with the old canard: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

I say this as someone who actually LIKES your SPS and I have had both good and bad years using different variations of it. In much the same vein as to how you responded to Dan's request, if a salesman cast aspersions upon a customer in a car dealership or an appliance store because the customer wanted to investigate the quality of a product more deeply the customer would have every legitimate reason in the world to be very suspicious and to wisely leave the premises immediately.

We know you are selling an idea without us paying actual money for it, but if you want more Singer converts then more hard evidence can go a long way towards that. If people who hate you still claim you falsified the win/loss statements, so what?? At least it would be a good start for the average neutral schmuck out there (such as myself and many other quiet forum lurkers).

By that same "so what" token, why would anybody not just throw their's up. You see, people only make such stupid requests for the same reason people like arci spend all their time stewing over my wins: they hope I won't do it so they can pretend I made it up, then if I do they spend all their waking hours telling themself that I had to have faked it somehow, or to use the selective deduction arci conjured up about how I said what I said about special plays and kickers. The experience is there from my years of chronicling my years of winning in the paper. It is and has always been the only way for certain people to handle it. There is a forum idiot/RS hater called Axelrod. There's also my wife's video of me being paid at the machine. After making up almost every possible excuse how it probably is not me who hit this beauty, then upon being told there is a video, the only thing left was for him was to claim I was playing with "someone else's money". These are the people I like to challenge to a bet, which of course are the same ones who hide under a rock every time it gets "close". You do remember arci running away from his own tax return challenge??

You're right, I'm not selling a thing. But you're also wrong: I'm not looking to convert anyone. Never was. Why? If too many players became as proficient as I am, it might hurt a good source of side income I have when I get to play.

[arcimede$]

Once again Singer provides no support for his own claims. Chuckle, chuckle.

[Count Room]

Once again Singer provides no support for his own claims. Chuckle, chuckle.

Arci: You've often accused Rob of projection. Can you see how you are projecting yourself right now? You're accusing Singer of providing no support for his claims without any support for your accusation itself. Yes, a lot of us know your talking points from previous posts, but in all fairness it would be good to address the specific points Rob made in his post. (ie. the wife's videotape, the years Rob wrote articles, etc.)

Not taking sides....just trying to provide a beacon of fairness in a hideously unfair world.

[Vegas_lover]

You do remember arci running away from his own tax return challenge??

Rob, the reason almost nobody believes anything you say is because you continue to repeat lies like the one above. It's all here at this forum for everybody to see. Arci didn't back out of it and you know it but you just have to repeat yourself to keep the battle going. Singer is back so we're back to the same Singer bullshit.

[redietz]

The way I see it, if Rob deviates from correct strategy according to some special plays, and that results in a .1% or .2% deficit from optimal play, that deficit could be ameliorated by two factors. First, he has less chair time than other people, so fatigue and errors aren't an issue. For most people, this could add back .05% or more. Second, his way of play has to be interpreted as wild and impulsive by most casinos as he jumps up through denominations. I assume most hosts and computer ratings would really want to attract such a player, so their offers and comps to Rob should outstrip those offered to people who pump the same amount through in a more conservative fashion over longer time. The increased comps and offers must be worth something, whether it's .1% or .2% or whatever. It may be much more. We see some evidence in this direction when CET shifts their programs to reward people who play more in a shorter time. The shift is to reward short-term, high-volume action.

Anyway, unless magic is part of the equation, Rob's overall difference from optimal play should be negligible in either direction.

[Alan Mendelson]

Gee, that's putting those thousands you paid for such special 7 Stars status to good use....

Some things in life money can't buy. Fun and memories are among them.

[Alan Mendelson]

If I simply sat down at a $10 machine without a strategy, instead of winning every year since my strategies began, I'd lose every or almost every year like you do.

Are you really this thick?

I never said play without a strategy. I said you are spinning your wheels at the lower denominations and by your own admission the lower denominations rarely get you to your win goal.

You have a $1,000 win goal? Okay. Take your $50,000 bankroll and sit down at a $100 8/5 Bonus machine or 9/6 Jacks machine in the high limit room at Caesars and hit two pair for a $500 profit. Hit it a second time for a $1,000. Getting two pair twice in a row happens all the time. Play your two hands and leave. No tips. No W2G. And there are few smokers in the Palace Court high limit room at Caesars.

Taking your huge bankroll to low level machines to hit a win goal of $1,000 is a blaring flaw in your strategy. Here's an analogy: That would be like me handing out flyers on a corner trying to reach 100,000 people in a day, when all I have to do is go on TV with a 30-second commercial to reach the same 100,000.

[Alan Mendelson]

Anyway, unless magic is part of the equation, Rob's overall difference from optimal play should be negligible in either direction.

Actually, in real dollars and cents, his special plays on a hand by hand basis do have very little difference from optimal play. Many of the special plays are actually "benign" because they tend to increase the number of smaller jackpots.

But that still hasn't resolved a major issue: Rob has said on the videos he doesn't hold kickers, yet he did in the case of the big $50K win. That's okay if he simply states the videos were not complete and totally correct.

The second issue, which I overlooked until now, is the video tape of the handpay. Rob, how about uploading that to YouTube and then we can put it here on the Forum for all to see along with your description of what's going on?

For the record: I don't doubt Rob won. The issue in my mind is the application and use of his strategy and if it is consistent or not. People win big jackpots so why not Rob? But more importantly was it the result of a consistent strategy or just luck?

[a2a3dseddie]

Rob, how about uploading that to YouTube and then we can put it here on the Forum for all to see along with your description of what's going on?

Just a wild guess Alan, but I doubt he will post it.

Here's a question though, Rob seems to post a lot on this forum. I imagine he posts on other forums as well. Does that qualify as "consulting" as a professional gambler? Is he allowed to pay himself a salary for time spent on internet forums "discussing" his strategies? Could he write off or deduct his electricity bill, and meals/groceries while logged onto this website reading comments?

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob seems to post a lot on this forum. I imagine he posts on other forums as well. Does that qualify as "consulting" as a professional gambler? Is he allowed to pay himself a salary for time spent on internet forums "discussing" his strategies? Could he write off or deduct his electricity bill, and meals/groceries while logged onto this website reading comments?

He cartainly wouldn't want to pay himself but he could raise an argument that going online is a business deduction.