Rob Singer didn't beat video poker

[jbjb]

ROB, it's not just AP's that are majority skeptical of your system and claims.

I don't think that the general public knows about Rob. I think there are maybe 200 people on the various forums that do.

I think if you went around casinos and asked random players what would they do if they just won a thousand dollars most would say "go home."

But what would the APs say? They'd say going home is meaningless because it's one long session.

According to this above logic, my hole carding blackjack BP's who are betting 2 hands of $500 each, should leave if they win the very first hands. That would be assinine!

[Alan Mendelson]

ROB, it's not just AP's that are majority skeptical of your system and claims.

I don't think that the general public knows about Rob. I think there are maybe 200 people on the various forums that do.

I think if you went around casinos and asked random players what would they do if they just won a thousand dollars most would say "go home."

But what would the APs say? They'd say going home is meaningless because it's one long session.

According to this above logic, my hole carding blackjack BP's who are betting 2 hands of $500 each, should leave if they win the very first hands. That would be assinine!

But this isn't about your hole carding blackjack players, is it? Rob doesnt give advice about blackjack, does he?

[kewlJ]

But this isn't about your hole carding blackjack players, is it? Rob doesnt give advice about blackjack, does he?

He doesn't? How many times has Rob stated that I am lying because no one can be a blackjack card counter in this era?

To those of us that count cards, whether for a living like I do, or at any level, it immediately tells us Rob has no clue of the topic that he is strongly voicing an opinion about. And frankly, that damages his credibility on all other topics. If he says things completely untrue about this topic, why should we believe anything this man has to say?

And frankly Alan, you suffer from the same situation. Your arguing with me about blackjack topics that you obviously have no clue about, damages your credibility on everything you say.

[Alan Mendelson]

Keekj, if you can get away with card counting and winning so much money the way you say you do then all I can say is congratulations. You da man.

[kewlJ]

Keekj, if you can get away with card counting and winning so much money the way you say you do then all I can say is congratulations. You da man.

I don't know why I waste my time here, and in particular with you.

[MaxPen]

Keekj, if you can get away with card counting and winning so much money the way you say you do then all I can say is congratulations. You da man.

I don't know why I waste my time here, and in particular with you.

I have been trying to figure that out as well. I chalk it up to one of life's mysteries.😜

[RS__]

Alan and Rob are masters at moving the goal posts.

There’s nothing wrong with stopping and counting your money and deciding if you want to keep playing or take a break. But how does that help you make money?

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan and Rob are masters at moving the goal posts.

There’s nothing wrong with stopping and counting your money and deciding if you want to keep playing or take a break. But how does that help you make money?

It doesn't. It only gives you an opportunity to decide to say "I've had enough" or "I'll try again." And what's wrong with that?

Because you're sitting at a machine doesn't mean you have to play like a machine. (Unless of course you're an AP and you have an edge?????)

[regnis]

Or are you both right. An AP, playing for profit, and allegedly playing with an edge. Of course he should put in the hours.

Now you have a casual gambler playing for entertainment with no edge. It can't hurt to stick those vouchers in your pocket and make sure you go home with a few bucks. It can't hurt to take a moment to count up and see where you stand and then decide have I lost enough or have I made enough so i'll go get dinner. It's not a question of how does that help you make money. Different goals--different reason for playing.

[Rob.Singer]

But this isn't about your hole carding blackjack players, is it? Rob doesnt give advice about blackjack, does he?

He doesn't? How many times has Rob stated that I am lying because no one can be a blackjack card counter in this era?

To those of us that count cards, whether for a living like I do, or at any level, it immediately tells us Rob has no clue of the topic that he is strongly voicing an opinion about. And frankly, that damages his credibility on all other topics. If he says things completely untrue about this topic, why should we believe anything this man has to say?

And frankly Alan, you suffer from the same situation. Your arguing with me about blackjack topics that you obviously have no clue about, damages your credibility on everything you say.

You're confused again kew. The reason I KNOW card counters can't get away with it anymore is because I've been told that and shown that by a high up friend of mine at the Peppermill. Not only do the guys with eyes keep track of what table players do--their computers are always alerting them as to who may be counting cards. Face recognition is shared around the state. Counters bounced from one place won't be allowed to play in most places in the state.

And you think some of us are stupid enuf to believe you trick people and computers while you get away with upping bets on positive counts? No wonder you skirt forums craving relevance. And no wonder you'll do anything to stay anonymous. You may think your gig keeps pulling wool over most of the dopes here, but you're really not getting away with a thing.

[RS__]

Alan and Rob are masters at moving the goal posts.

There’s nothing wrong with stopping and counting your money and deciding if you want to keep playing or take a break. But how does that help you make money?

It doesn't. It only gives you an opportunity to decide to say "I've had enough" or "I'll try again." And what's wrong with that?

Because you're sitting at a machine doesn't mean you have to play like a machine. (Unless of course you're an AP and you have an edge?????)

Or are you both right. An AP, playing for profit, and allegedly playing with an edge. Of course he should put in the hours.

Now you have a casual gambler playing for entertainment with no edge. It can't hurt to stick those vouchers in your pocket and make sure you go home with a few bucks. It can't hurt to take a moment to count up and see where you stand and then decide have I lost enough or have I made enough so i'll go get dinner. It's not a question of how does that help you make money. Different goals--different reason for playing.

My question was in reference to Rob's system, where after he hits for a certain amount, he pockets that money and says it's a "soft profit". Again, how does that make money?


I'm not saying it's a bad thing to do for a recreational gambler who is playing at a disadvantage. Any time you're playing with a disadvantage and you walk away, the better off you are (financially).

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob's soft profits don't make money. They prevent you from losing all your money.

[kewlJ]

"soft profit"

Let's stop using this term....what a crock of sh**.

[Alan Mendelson]

"soft profit"

Let's stop using this term....what a crock of sh**.

I'm all for more accurate terminology. What would you call hitting the cash out button after a win but you decide to keep playing?

[kewlJ]

"soft profit"

Let's stop using this term....what a crock of sh**.

I'm all for more accurate terminology. What would you call hitting the cash out button after a win but you decide to keep playing?

I call it VOODOO.

If you are going to keep playing, why are you hitting the cash out button? Trying to trick the machine?

[Rob.Singer]

Rob's soft profits don't make money. They prevent you from losing all your money.

This is partially true. The other part is that the soft profits, as they accumulate, require less and less of a winning hit to attain a session ending win goal. This is how they help make money. They also many times mean you are going down in denomination to continue play--not up.

[kewlJ]

You're confused again kew. The reason I KNOW card counters can't get away with it anymore is because I've been told that and shown that by a high up friend of mine at the Peppermill. Not only do the guys with eyes keep track of what table players do--their computers are always alerting them as to who may be counting cards. Face recognition is shared around the state. Counters bounced from one place won't be allowed to play in most places in the state.

Rob, this is complete nonsense. It just is....all of it.

I too have friends that work the pits, here in Vegas. Good friends that have shared a lot and I have learned a lot from. As a matter of fact they share some stuff that they shouldn't and that I never asked for (like database entries). At most places table game players are not top priority. If surveillance is watching a table they are more likely to be watching the dealer than anything else. It is only when an evaluation of a player is requested that they focus on a player.

Computers aren't alerting anyone as to card counters. There is no program or technology that does that. There are programs used in the evaluation process, but like I said, that evaluation has to be requested.

Facial recognition used by the casino industry has been very weak. Much different quality than government facial recognition. It is getting a little better, but still not very good or accurate. It needs a real clear headshot and usually the only place they get that is at the cashier. That is why it is best not to cashout after a session. Also this technology is only as good as the person operating it and the casino is just not paying for top people. You get what you pay for.

Upping bets is NOT the problem. The big tell for card counters is returning to the smaller or minimum bet after the shuffle. I play an approach that minimized that playing short sessions and exiting after showing my spread.

I am not looking to continue to fight with you, but just about everything you just stated is incorrect. It really is.

[kewlJ]

Oh and here is how the database program like OSN or biometrics works. Casinos have to subscribe to the service. Most do, but most don't put new entries in, they just look at the entries, and then only when something raises their suspicion, and if they are not too busy. By networking with other players, we know which casinos are active as far as entering information and avoid them. Cosmo here in Vegas is very active in entering new information for example.

So most casinos just review the entries and most just review the recent entries. So when a player does get a new entry, the danger period is only a few days to a week and then it is buried. If it is a bad entry, you might be advised to lay low for a few days, play places that you know don't even participate much.

[Alan Mendelson]

A question for you kewlj: is there any casino that really knows you are counting and where you win big money and doesn't care and lets you continue without comment?

[mickeycrimm]

I don't mind answering decent questions like this. And naturally, an obsessed sicko like eddie won't like that we've stopped back here at Tahoe for a week on our way back to S. Dakota after going to a SF wedding, so I have the time to.

I'd say about 2000 hands on avg., which is 10,000 coins in. My speed was 1400 accurate hph as an AP, but since the new strategy was developed I don't rush.

An avg. session is about four hours. One ended on the second hand, another took more than 12 hours. Given that my avg. win/session played (including losing sessions) has been over $3000, my % of bankroll win is nearly 6% overall. In just the winning sessions, it's quite a bit higher. However, this includes sessions where I lose money as well as "failed" sessions where I have to quit after winning anywhere from $1 to $2499. Having to quit means I've played thru all of my credits. There is never a total loss of bankroll, because of the numerous amounts of soft profit 40+ credits cashouts along the way.

Ah, yes, the soft profits. This is where Rob plays a game with himself. He will occasionally cash out a ticket, stick it in his pocket, then insert more money into the machine. He says he usually does this after a full house. Does it change his results? No. He is still up or down the exact same amount. There is zero effect on outcome. But what it does serve to do is muddy up the waters for anyone trying to draw a bead on what he is doing.

He starts with a 57K bankroll. And he had three 57K bankrolls. He says he has an 85% success rate at getting the $2500 or higher win with just one 57K bankroll. From these two stats one would assume he has a failure rate of 15% of losing the 57K. Failure rates are important. You can calculate things from it. Like you would have a 1 in 44 chance of losing two 57K bankrolls in a row. And a 1 in 267 chance of losing all three 57K bankrolls in a row.

A trip a week to the casino is 50 times a year. Ten years and its 500 visits. That would be like a dozen times Rob would have lost two bankrolls in a row, down to his last bankroll and sweating bullets. And he dodged the bullet of losing three bankrolls in a row, which would wipe him out, even though it should happen about twice in 500 sessions.

Thats what the overview is. But Rob muddies all that up with the soft profit bullshit about not really losing all of the 57K bankroll. So much so that any math professor would be driven nuts by his bullshit.

This is the craziest mumbo jumbo I've read so far! It is a make believe world created by make believe math! My son made thousands of dollars as a computer analyst selling virtual property to people who were unable to program them in their make believe cities, etc. I couldn't believe anyone would purchase something that didn't exist so they could operate in a make believe world- but now I see it's possible. Use make believe math to create make believe sessions. It's easy to put it on paper- but it comes out different in the real world.

So it's "make believe math" to you? How quaint. In the forward to his book, A Brief History of Time, Dr. Stephen Hawking said he was told by other published astro-physicists that if he put just one equation in the book it would cut sales in half. That's just how averse the masses are to mathematics. I think you are just a little more math challenged than the average person in a masses. You've never heard of "failure rate?" It was the first concept established in Probability Theory. It's been around for 370 years.

What if I were to proposition you to a little game played with one die and a cup? You know the chances of rolling a 3 are 1 in 6. Expressed as odds it's 5 to 1 against. I say I can roll a 3 in just 4 rolls of the die. Let's make it an even money proposition and we play the game 500 times.

Hint: Sling, you have to use the failure rate to determine where you are percentagewise in this game.