Testing Rob Singer's Theories

[redietz]

Okay, here's the problem as I see it. As soon as Rob commits one of his systems to a set of flow chart instructions, anyone could program a simulation running those instructions and demonstrate the non-value. So Rob is going to have to insert some human factor, some subjective judgement that prevents simulations from mimicking what he does. Or he's going to have to refuse to commit instructions to paper. I don't see any easy way around these issues.

We seem to have hit a mutual snag here. Rob's instructions are too complex for Alan to try. This does not surprise me.

[regnis]

Rob and Alan meet. Rob plays the free play using his system on video explaining what and why as he plays.

Also--Alan gets the lunch he is owed!!

[arcimede$]

This banking of soft profits even as you lose just doesn't make sense to me. Whether it's soft profits or new money coming out of my wallet, it's still my money.

It's all part of the scam. Make is so complicated you can always claim the 'student' didn't play correctly. All scams have this kind of trick to keep the marks in the dark.

Otherwise, what you described is a simple negative progression which have been around for decades. Singer couldn't claim how brilliant he was by just pushing another me too progression that has been mathematically proven to be worthless.

[bigfoot66]

I can see where this may be true with you, Dan, and others playing a lot at Caesars properties, but other casino chains can treat this differently. I've had very good offers playing the best paytables in the casino (99.1-99.8%) so long as I play the higher denominations on the machines for at least a couple hours.

Very true, there is a small casino that sends me north of $300 a month for playing a game that is better than 99.9% at the quarter level

[Dan Druff]

Very true, there is a small casino that sends me north of $300 a month for playing a game that is better than 99.9% at the quarter level

There are some casinos which haven't yet computed the proper theoretical on their machines. This especially seems to occur at multi-game machines, where there is a wide variance of house edge. Often these machines cannot generate different theoreticals for each game. They should be able to, but for whatever reason, many don't.

In fact, this is still occurring at CET properties.

However, CET has lowered its comps and RFB dramatically, so the end result is that your comps there end up being fairly crappy regardless.