I am not trying to defend Singer's system, but I do want to keep the discussion "on track." So arcimede$ I'd like to comment about this post:
The "math" does give us the expected return. If you vary the strategy dictated by the math, your return will be different -- either better or worse. Rob made it very clear in the discussion of the "special plays" what the "math expected return is" and how his "special plays" vary from that.
Yes, the "math" says his special plays will lose. But when he gets "lucky" and his special plays win, he can come out ahead of the expected return.
Rob has not included the "fifth card flipovers" in his strategy, so I don't see how it applies to the discussion of his strategy?
I really think that the evaluation of Rob's strategy actually comes down to this: how often do his special plays "hit" and what kind of "wins" do those special plays generate and can the dollar value of those special plays that "hit" offset the losses he has from not following the math?
Now I am going to ask all of you this question: is there a way to test that? And is there a way for Rob to teach when he makes his special plays -- what is that 5% of the time he deviates from "correct strategy"?
On that session, yes. But not over time. Since he uses special plays quite often it would not very long for the ER difference to make a substantial difference.
As they say in a trial, it goes to show the character of the person. If the person cannot be trusted then their claims become suspect.
How often is easy. Just apply statistics. That is what has ALREADY been done to determine the ER. That is why your continual retreat to this position in silly. The work has been done, the answer is known, you've been told the answer many times. You simply don't like the answer.
Already answered above. If I did the computation on an abacus instead of a computer would it change your mind?
One of your problems, Alan, is you are only thinking about what happens when Singer hits one of those special plays. You need to focus on what happens when he doesn't. Take 10/6 DDB as an example. If dealt 2266x a special play would toss the second pair and go for the low quad. However, what is the return when a quad is not hit. The return is about 3 coins. The return of holding two pair is 8.8 coins. Singer gives up 5.8 coins for what? Well, we know it's 1:360 chance to hit the quad. We also know that quads occur about 1:420 hands in normal DDB strategy. The choice is a trade-off of 1.16 additional hands for holding two pair against an improvement of 1.17 at hitting the quad. That means he has increased his chances by a mere 1%. So, the reality is that many of the special plays provide almost no improved chances of winning while causing additional losses.
Last edited by arcimede$; 07-11-2011 at 10:43 AM.
I asked these questions for a reason. At one point you state you apply optimal play 95% of the time and you make special plays 5% of the time. Since you don't keep track of your own special plays there's no way you can tell if you even apply optimal play enough to keep the losses small besides looking at your bankroll. Simply because most of the times you won't hit a better winner on the special plays. Looking at it from a mathimatical angle you just accomplish there's no way to check or your way of playing. I was only interested in knowing how many hands per hour you play on average to get a notion of the amount of special plays you make during an hour. Since that changes every hour and maybe even every session your play in total consist of more than an average "gamble". Arci, thanks for stepping in on this one, you make some valid points.
Now, Rob, please clarify, how many session do you end up being a winner on average. Do you only stop playing when you hit your $2500 dollar win goal or do you sometimes quit before that and accept a smaller win? What's the average amount you're down on a losing session?
Last edited by Vegas_lover; 07-11-2011 at 11:09 AM.
Huh? I asked you to pay attention and you seem not to have grasped any of it. It's like calling AMEX and getting someone in India, who answers every question asked with a script having nothing to do with the question.
You think it makes sense to write down every time a special play is made, what it is, and why it's made? And most of the time I DO hit a better winner with the special play than what the optimal hold could have rendered. You still don't get it: If the dealt hand in As5d8d9cQh, the optimal hold in the games I play is AQ. I hold just the A. Holding the AQ will almost always yield a high pair IF you're going to get a winner. Because you're taking two slots and drawing only 3, opportunity for big winners is seriously decreased. But holding an A only opens it up to much more opportunity, and many more of the winners are more than a high pair. Phew!
The win goal is $2500 minimum. Always.
Arci will never input anything helpful because he's a hateful person who is overtaken by envy over my vp success. He's unique in that as an APer he has lost--even so much as to have been forced to leave LV back for beautiful Minnesota with his tail tucked firmly between his legs. Didn't work out, and it was just another scramble he needed to take care of before hitting the forums with another made-up explanation. Plus you've seen him humble himself trying to do damage control whenever I bring up his anti-social behavior on the other forums.
Here you go again throwing mud. Alan, I guess this is all ok for you right? Even when other contributors get back on topic to ask a number of questions to get some info from the million dollar man, he pulls you back down again. I'll refer to your previous request stated in slightly different words (you asked us to drop the testosterone and get back on topic): "Please don't mind Mr. Singer being an arrogant troublemaker, take all the insults you can take but please stay calm and civil and swallow it all"..........
See http://www.alanbestbuys.com/id197.html and you will see this play is listed as number 28. The only difference is it is 4499x instead of 2266x. Could it be I know more about his special plays than he does? Could it be he makes it up as he goes along?
Last edited by arcimede$; 07-11-2011 at 12:27 PM.
Vegas_Lover is correct... there is too much time spent on who is lying and who isn't, and what are lies, and who lives where and what people are driving. Let's stop it.
We have another Forum for cars.
We have an Open forum to discuss where you enjoy living.
Please guys, let's talk about Rob's system here without the "colorful comments." Yes, Rob, that includes you. I'm spending too much time here and it is taking me away from the work that pays the bills.
That is where you go when you click on 10/6 DDB. It also states those are the plays for 10/6 DDB at the top of the page. So, that is where some unsuspecting person would be directed. I guess when you're dealing with something this exact then it really doesn't matter. Also, item 34 is the same play.
I suspect it would make a slight difference when playing 9/5 TDPP. You would hit the goal 8% more often. But remember, you only hit the quad .28% of the time so this is an improvement from .26% by playing optimal strategy. Do you really think reaching a goal .02% (2 out of 1000) more often is worth the cost? Every special play costs money.
Last edited by arcimede$; 07-11-2011 at 01:43 PM.
Alan, have you ever asked Singer why he pockets wins over 40 credits? For example, look at the 9/5 TBPP example. A win of 45 credits for a FH would allow 9 more hands to be played. That provides (9/420) a 2% chance of hitting a quad. That is 8 times more often than his special play above. If a strategy is supposed to generate wins and go home then pocketing these wins is 180° opposite of what you should do. In fact, this one play alone likely reduces the chances of going home a winner by more than ALL the special plays combined help to produce a winner.
This is trivial math. Anyone who claims to have done a "risk analysis" is blowing wind up your ... you know what.
Last edited by arcimede$; 07-11-2011 at 02:07 PM.
One other factor I haven't mentioned is the amount lost as a result of unsuccessful special plays also puts the player in a bigger hole. That means whenever a quad is hit, the probability it will produce a winning session is reduced. I suspect this would completely negate the 1% when a special play would produce a winning session in DDB. It also would reduce the times any special play produces a winning session.
It is similar to the effect that pocketing wins has on the system. Although in this case it means bigger winners are required to cover for the losses acquired by the use of the special plays.
Whoops! Arci is caught (edited) about what he claims to know about my play strategy. And what's even funnier here is that he's even misleading HIMSELF now since the post he quoted by me only talks about 10/6DDB, and he's pretending "play listed as number 28" refers to 10/6DDB when it's clearly identified as TBP+!
(remainder of post deleted)
Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 07-11-2011 at 03:10 PM. Reason: Now, Im getting serious. Stick to facts and stop the personal attacks.
Once again Rob you're a day late and a dollar short. Alan already mentioned this and it turns out #34 is the relevant special play.
One does wonder how dedicated you are to your own strategy when clicking on 10/6 DDB takes a person to 9/5 DBPP. Did you ever check it out? I suppose you're going to blame Alan for this screw up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)