Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 142

Thread: An Open email to me about Rob Singer and the debate on this and the LVA Forums

  1. #81
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    5. Every session incorporates optimal holds and special plays throughout. It's the structured use of them in concert that creates the wins, not the use of one vs. the use of the other.
    OK, explain how the "structured use" of ER lowering plays increases the ER. This should be humorous.

  2. #82
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    Singer's comments about the math are always hilarious as the math makes it clear that no system can change the expected return. The math proves he is wrong. The math proves his special plays are losers. The math demonstrates that many of his claims (eg. 5th card flips-overs, hot/cold cycles) are so unrealistic that any normal person would assume they are lies.

    Add that to his narcissistic attacks on anyone who comes out and speaks the truth and you know everything you'll ever need to know about him.
    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"?

  3. #83
    Originally Posted by Vegas_lover View Post
    Of course, more of the high horse attitude.

    Now let's get back to the issues at hand. You make your special plays all the time. I've got a few questions for you:
    How many hands per hour do you play?
    How many times per hour (on average) do you make a special play?
    How do you keep track of the amount of special plays you've made?
    How do you know what specific hand qualifies as a hand for special play for you?
    How strict is that 5% maximum for you?
    What's you're average result on playing perfect math play. In other words, what percentage of winning sessions do you have because of correct math play?

    Let's start with this and see where we go from there..come on, let's end the mistery....
    These are all good questions. And I would like to see the answers. But Im really interested in knowing when a special play is chosen over the "correct strategy play"? Is it done only when losing, or even when winning?

  4. #84
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    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.
    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.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    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?
    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.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    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?
    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.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    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"?
    Already answered above. If I did the computation on an abacus instead of a computer would it change your mind?

  5. #85
    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.

  6. #86
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Clearly, you have never paid attention.

    1. HPH is unimportant and irrelevant when playing for goals. I can play 1400 hph for an hour without errors and I used to do it as a fool AP. After an hour EVERYONE's (including Dancer & arci and any other AP who claims but cannot prove they win all the time) accuracy stumbles exponentially the longer they play. SPS has no requirement for speed and is therefore a far more enjoyable strategy.

    2. Special plays come up on average about 1 out of every 20 hands. Do the math. Playing 300 hph equates to 15 special plays per hour; 500 hph is 25, etc.

    3. I don't keep track of the special plays I make, other than to know what they are and when to use them.

    4. 5% is not a maximum and is just an estimated average.

    5. Every session incorporates optimal holds and special plays throughout. It's the structured use of them in concert that creates the wins, not the use of one vs. the use of the other.
    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.

  7. #87
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    Lie #1: I left vpfree on my own. My so-called attack was pointing out that Dancer's articles/posts were often a little egotistical. Yup, just awful and repeated many other times by other members. I don't participate in any forum that censors the truth. I told that to the vpfree administrator and told him if he wanted me back he'd have to apologize. I haven't been back. The interesting thing is the same administrator who claims in his own words that freevpfree is open to free speech did ban me from there. He obviously did not want the facts available to the other forum members. A true coward if there ever was one.

    Lie #2: Frank simply decided he didn't want to post on a thread where Singer, in one of his many aliases, started attacking me and anyone else who presented facts. Alan was there, and he knows that I never attacked Frank personally.

    Lie #3: Rob, in what is most likely another alias, claimed I was a disruptor when I continue to point out the facts. Anyone who read that LVA thread can easily determine I never disrupted anything. So, anyone making that claim is most likely to be Singer himself. (As if it wasn't already obvious). It was humorous how I controlled him over there. He had to shut up or give himself away completely.

    Alan, as you can easily see, Singer will lie at almost anything. However, the KEY thing to note is he has ZERO comebacks to the mathematical statements I made. This is the way Singer always operates. He attacks people because he has NO, ZERO, NADA, ZILCH arguments to support his claims. You will NEVER see him try to present any hard facts that supports his claims.
    For someone with so many personal issues, you'd think he'd at least TRY not to look so sad as he radiates his pathological lying in 5000 words or less!

  8. #88
    Originally Posted by Vegas_lover View Post
    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?
    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.

  9. #89
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    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.
    Here's Arci exposing more of his uneducated knowledge about my strategy. He tries so hard doesn't he!? If I play 10/6 DDB I never break up any 2 pair except for Aces. I said he had maybe 60% knowledge of what I do. Change that to 50% at best.

  10. #90
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    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.

    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"..........

  11. #91
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Here's Arci exposing more of his uneducated knowledge about my strategy. He tries so hard doesn't he!? If I play 10/6 DDB I never break up any 2 pair except for Aces. I said he had maybe 60% knowledge of what I do. Change that to 50% at best.
    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.

  12. #92
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    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.
    If winning over $100K while spending my winters in Vegas classifies as "didn't work out", then I guess it didn't. Oh yeah, that was mainly playing quarters until the last year. I wonder how many lies Singer will have to post before Alan catches on?

  13. #93
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    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?
    Arc, I dont know if this affects your math, but the example you cited is not for 10/6 DDB.

  14. #94
    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.

  15. #95
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Arc, I dont know if this affects your math, but the example you cited is not for 10/6 DDB.
    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.

  16. #96
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    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.
    I would call that spot on! But I'm certain Rob will disagree
    Last edited by Vegas_lover; 07-11-2011 at 02:06 PM.

  17. #97
    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.

  18. #98
    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.

  19. #99
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    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?
    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.

  20. #100
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    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)
    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.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •