Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 141

Thread: Rob Singer's claims revisited

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    The person posting here as Rob Singer makes claims of having won over a million dollars, playing -EV video poker, while using a progressive betting system and stop limits.

    The mathematical facts are that 1.) you can not grind your way to long-term winning play at a -EV game. You can hit a single one time jackpot that can get you there, but that us NOT Singer's claim. And 2.) no betting system, progressive or otherwise, can change a -EV (losing) game into a +EV (winning) game.

    Now, I myself have made claims of winning over a million dollars total from advantage play, most of that (956k) from blackjack play. I believe mickeycrimm has made claim to earning nearly a million dollars from advantage play. Others, AP's such as Axelwolf, RS, MaxPen, monet, jbjb, moses, and others, while I don't recall any specific monetary amounts to their claims, all claim to have made money from the casinos, most claim that as their livelihood.

    So what is the difference between my claims, mickey's claims, Axel, RS and the other's claims and Rob Singer's claims? One word: Mathematics.

    Anyone can chose to believe me, mickeycrimm, Axelwolf, RS, and the others, or you can choose not to believe us. That is up to each person and what and who they find credible. But the difference is that the things myself and mickeycrimm, and the other AP's claim are mathematically possible. The machine guys are playing +EV games, and finding +EV situations. I count cards, which undeniably (except in the mind of Rob Singer) gives a player an advantage. That is why the casinos fight so hard to stop us. Some of the others engage in holecarding or other advantage plays. But ALL give the player an advantage, a mathematical edge, or turn our play to + expected value.

    Singer's claims are mathematically IMPOSSIBLE and he has provided NOTHING that turns his -EV play into +EV, giving even the possibility of winning long term.

    Now it isn't just the AP's who are based in mathematics that dismiss Rob Singer's claims. The owner of this site, Dan Druff, a professional poker player, dismisses Singer's claims as impossible. Now I don't know if a successful poker player qualifies under the definition of advantage player (AP)? He is playing with an advantage, no doubt, but he is playing against other players rather than the casino. I guess that is open for debate. I believe Dan Druff exercises some video poker play that may qualify as advantage play, but an not sure. But I do know that a successful poker player, is all about the mathematics involved. So when Dan Druff joins the rest of us, who are all about math in dismissing Singer's claims, it matters.

    As I said, anyone can choose to believe or not believe anyone else and their claims. As I always say, "it usually isn't that hard to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking". That goes to credibility. And anyone can choose to find me, or anyone else credible or not credible, but it all starts with mathematics. Are anyone's claims mathematically possible. Singer's claims simply can not clear that first hurdle of mathematically possible.

    Near as I can tell there are only like 3-4 members of this site, maybe 1-2 more silent members that have chosen to believe Singer's mathematically impossible claims. Alan, coach belly and slingshot the most vocal. And it's funny, these 3 and Singer make up the anti-AP fraction of this site. So not only are they embracing Rob Singer's mathematically impossible claims, but the always come out against the mathematical proven possibilities of the AP member's claims. Some sort of weird bias or agenda. I believe it is bitterness because of their own gambling history.

    So Alan, coach belly, slingshot go ahead and embrace Singer and his mathematically impossible claims. I am done trying to protect you. Better yet, put them to the test. Invest your own money and see what happens? In no time at all, you too can be living out your retirement years living in a camper is some relative's driveway, or perhaps in a tent in someone's back yard, mooching utilities....shades of cousin Eddie from the vacation movies and modern day Rob Singer.
    Last edited by kewlJ; 08-18-2018 at 06:39 PM.

  2. #2
    It occurs to me that there are probably members here that deserved a mention on the AP, mathematical side of the ledger that I left out. Take no offense. Most likely it is just me not being familiar.

    You will also notice that I left out someone like a Redietz, who has extensive claims involving sports betting. Moses also has extensive claims of success involving sports betting. My omission is not doubting anyone's claims in this area. I just don't know enough about the subject matter or how mathematics plays into that particular field. This area is above my pay grade...so to speak.....above my knowledge, so take no offense. I chose to speak of only of which I have some knowledge of.

  3. #3
    KewlJ- just the fact that you don't listen to Alan and the others is a give away. They've told you over and over they don't support Rob's strategy- or even some of his picks on hands. The math? Do you think a VP player can win 5% of his bankroll with good strategy? And could this person actually hit a huge winner in a game? It does happen. And what are you protecting me from? Playing an artt strategy that allows me to play longer for less money? From hurting my health ? I was playing for only 2 hours and nearly froze and had the night sweats after I got home. I'm happy where I am and although even Rob doesn't think I understand his strategy, I do well enough to enjoy myself. As I have always said, I got the premise in the article "What's wrong with a positive progression?" from VP Truth and the strategy is flexible enough for a flexible mind to experiment with- even while playing the basic strategy.

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by slingshot View Post
    KewlJ- just the fact that you don't listen to Alan and the others is a give away. They've told you over and over they don't support Rob's strategy- or even some of his picks on hands.
    Alan ALWAYS comes down supporting Singer. BUT, let's clear this up right now.

    Alan Mendelson: Do you believe Rob Singer's claims of having won a million dollars playing his progressive betting system? Or do you believe he is lying?

  5. #5
    This is on little Robbie's wish list to Santa this year. He has been looking to upgrade from that other piece of shit camper of his.

    Name:  compact-camper2.jpg
Views: 654
Size:  300.4 KB

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by slingshot View Post
    KewlJ- just the fact that you don't listen to Alan and the others is a give away. They've told you over and over they don't support Rob's strategy- or even some of his picks on hands.
    Alan ALWAYS comes down supporting Singer. BUT, let's clear this up right now.

    Alan Mendelson: Do you believe Rob Singer's claims of having won a million dollars playing his progressive betting system? Or do you believe he is lying?
    Valid question.

    I don't know if Rob won a million dollars but it is very conceivable to me that a high limit video poker player can win $100k a year.

    Rob has never presented tax returns.

    But kewlj I am more concerned with what you wrote above: "no betting system, progressive or otherwise, can change a -EV (losing) game into a +EV (winning) game."

    I wish you'd stop this. While I don't follow Rob's system or strategy I have spoken to him in depth about CERTAIN parts of it. I can tell you this and try to let it get through your stubborness:

    ROB HAS NEVER SAID HE CAN TURN A NEGATIVE EV GAME INTO A POSITIVE GAME.

    Once and for all STOP IT.

    There is one question and one question only: did he really win the money. Whether it was at a +EV game or a -EV game is of NO consequence.

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post

    ROB HAS NEVER SAID HE CAN TURN A NEGATIVE EV GAME INTO A POSITIVE GAME...There is one question and one question only: did he really win the money. Whether it was at a +EV game or a -EV game is of NO consequence.
    *ahem*

    Given that machines are programmed to pay out certain percentage over time, i.e. are "a negative EV game," then must it not follow that when a player claims he has beaten the casinos out of a lot of money over time that a necessary corollary to the claim is that he has turned it into "a positive EV game?"

    Otherwise that only leaves luck, cheating, and leprechauns.
    Last edited by MisterV; 08-19-2018 at 09:51 AM.
    What, Me Worry?

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by MisterV View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post

    ROB HAS NEVER SAID HE CAN TURN A NEGATIVE EV GAME INTO A POSITIVE GAME...There is one question and one question only: did he really win the money. Whether it was at a +EV game or a -EV game is of NO consequence.
    *ahem*

    Given that machines are programmed to pay out certain percentage over time, i.e. are "a negative EV game," then must it not follow that when a player claims he has beaten the casinos out of a lot of money over time that a necessary corollary to the claim is that he has turned it into "a positive EV game?"

    Otherwise that only leaves luck, cheating, and leprechauns.
    No. People win at -EV games.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Alan Mendelson: Do you believe Rob Singer's claims of having won a million dollars playing his progressive betting system? Or do you believe he is lying?
    Valid question.

    I don't know if Rob won a million dollars but it is very conceivable to me that a high limit video poker player can win $100k a year.

    Rob has never presented tax returns.

    But kewlj I am more concerned with what you wrote above: "no betting system, progressive or otherwise, can change a -EV (losing) game into a +EV (winning) game."

    I wish you'd stop this. While I don't follow Rob's system or strategy I have spoken to him in depth about CERTAIN parts of it. I can tell you this and try to let it get through your stubborness:

    ROB HAS NEVER SAID HE CAN TURN A NEGATIVE EV GAME INTO A POSITIVE GAME.

    Once and for all STOP IT.

    There is one question and one question only: did he really win the money. Whether it was at a +EV game or a -EV game is of NO consequence.
    I'll give you credit for answering Alan. I didn't think you would. I thought you would play your game where you don't acknowledge or answer what you don't want to hear. But you didn't really answer did you? You went back to the old "Mendelson tap dance routine".

    Actually Alan, the fact that Singer claims to have earned 100k over many years is more the problem than if it was a one time hit resulting in a million dollars. So thanks for pointing this out again. IF a player was playing very high stakes, say $100 denomination ($500 per spin), you could make the case for a one year, hit of a million dollars. The player would have just needed to hit 3-4 Royals in that year, while not losing too much in between. Unlikely, but not impossible. However, this is NOT what Singer's claim is.

    BUT 100k, year after year, playing a -EV game, otherwise known as grinding, just is not mathematically possible. And THIS IS what Singer's claim is. So I will say again for you Alan: You can not grind your way to winnings, year after year, playing a -EV game. You need something to turn the game +EV.


    Now I want to go back to the original question that you tap danced around. The question wasn't do you know if Singer's claims are true. The question was and remains, Do you, Alan Mendelson believe Rob Singer's claims of earning more than a million dollars (especially spread out over 10 years, winning year after year). Do you believe it Alan?


    Let the Mendelson tap dance continue.

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Alan Mendelson: Do you believe Rob Singer's claims of having won a million dollars playing his progressive betting system? Or do you believe he is lying?
    Valid question.

    I don't know if Rob won a million dollars but it is very conceivable to me that a high limit video poker player can win $100k a year.

    Rob has never presented tax returns.

    But kewlj I am more concerned with what you wrote above: "no betting system, progressive or otherwise, can change a -EV (losing) game into a +EV (winning) game."

    I wish you'd stop this. While I don't follow Rob's system or strategy I have spoken to him in depth about CERTAIN parts of it. I can tell you this and try to let it get through your stubborness:

    ROB HAS NEVER SAID HE CAN TURN A NEGATIVE EV GAME INTO A POSITIVE GAME.

    Once and for all STOP IT.

    There is one question and one question only: did he really win the money. Whether it was at a +EV game or a -EV game is of NO consequence.
    I'll give you credit for answering Alan. I didn't think you would. I thought you would play your game where you don't acknowledge or answer what you don't want to hear. But you didn't really answer did you? You went back to the old "Mendelson tap dance routine".

    Actually Alan, the fact that Singer claims to have earned 100k over many years is more the problem than if it was a one time hit resulting in a million dollars. So thanks for pointing this out again. IF a player was playing very high stakes, say $100 denomination ($500 per spin), you could make the case for a one year, hit of a million dollars. The player would have just needed to hit 3-4 Royals in that year, while not losing too much in between. Unlikely, but not impossible. However, this is NOT what Singer's claim is.

    BUT 100k, year after year, playing a -EV game, otherwise known as grinding, just is not mathematically possible. And THIS IS what Singer's claim is. So I will say again for you Alan: You can not grind your way to winnings, year after year, playing a -EV game. You need something to turn the game +EV.


    Now I want to go back to the original question that you tap danced around. The question wasn't do you know if Singer's claims are true. The question was and remains, Do you, Alan Mendelson believe Rob Singer's claims of earning more than a million dollars (especially spread out over 10 years, winning year after year). Do you believe it Alan?


    Let the Mendelson tap dance continue.
    I can't tell you if Rob really won the money. But stop twisting what I said. I said "I don't know if Rob won a million dollars but it is very conceivable to me that a high limit video poker player can win $100k a year."

  11. #11
    What you're saying is basically correct K.J. but you keep repeating the same thing over and over.
    It seems as if you are imagining you are doing some great service to gamblers all over the world by shooting down false claims.

    But I've got some news for you. If you think gamblers are going to stop playing -EV games and wise up and stop dreaming of winning betting progressions then you're the one who's dreaming. Absolutely dreaming.
    Anyone who seriously wants to bet with an edge with even the least little bit of common sense can easily find out the truth about what is happening. They don't need you to educate them. The info is out there and is readily and easily obtainable.

    Gamblers don't want to be told the truth. They won't listen. They want to dream. They want easy money. AP operations are too much work for them. They're not going to change - for the most part.
    You're not going to change that with your lengthy passionate diatribes. What you are doing with these diatribes is roughly similar to giving a homeless guy with a cup $5 and telling him that alcohol and drugs are bad for him.
    please don't feed the trolls

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Half Smoke View Post
    What you're saying is basically correct K.J. but you keep repeating the same thing over and over.
    It seems as if you are imagining you are doing some great service to gamblers all over the world by shooting down false claims.

    But I've got some news for you. If you think gamblers are going to stop playing -EV games and wise up and stop dreaming of winning betting progressions then you're the one who's dreaming. Absolutely dreaming.
    Anyone who seriously wants to bet with an edge with even the least little bit of common sense can easily find out the truth about what is happening. They don't need you to educate them. The info is out there and is readily and easily obtainable.

    Gamblers don't want to be told the truth. They won't listen. They want to dream. They want easy money. AP operations are too much work for them. They're not going to change - for the most part.
    You're not going to change that with your lengthy passionate diatribes. What you are doing with these diatribes is roughly similar to giving a homeless guy with a cup $5 and telling him that alcohol and drugs are bad for him.
    Nobody has to read any of these posts. I bypass many posts. It is just like the TV or Radio. It isn't that hard to turn the channel. You can even turn the whole thing off if one chooses. Go to the lake and go fishing.

  13. #13
    Sportsbetting has little to do with who I think will win. It has everything to do with finding value. For instance, my cousin loves college football. HE really studies it and wins around 55% of his bets. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. But last year I made more money on one game than he did the entire season. Hawaii was playing at Air Force. The game was halted because of a thunderstorm. Playing conditions were horrible. Washington was a 1/2 hour away from start time at Colorado. I called a friend of mine in Boulder and he said he couldn't see how they could possibly play football in this weather. So I took the over/under. The score at half was 10-0.

    Generally, the mistakes for setting the lines are made in MLB and NHL. The NFL is tough. NBA not easy.

    Blackjack is simply finding value as well. It pays the bills and fun. Sports go to home improvements and investments. The bills are paid and we have some fun. But I'm reaing for more after reading MC's thread on his travels. Many home improvements have already been done and investments/savings grow. Next step is Artificial Turf. Then Master Bath remodel. I guess I'm okay as long as I don't answer my phone.

  14. #14
    Alan can’t even count to 18, we can’t expect him to understand complicated math where fractions are involved.
    #FreeTyde

  15. #15
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    Alan can’t even count to 18, we can’t expect him to understand complicated math where fractions are involved.
    See I believe (<-my beliefs) that Alan can count to 18. I also believe he understands the math more than he acknowledges. And I believe Alan does not believe Singer's claims, but is NOT honest enough to say so. Maybe he is afraid of Singer or maybe he just needs Singer on his side as part of his anti-AP agenda.

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    See I believe (<-my beliefs) that Alan can count to 18. I also believe he understands the math more than he acknowledges. And I believe Alan does not believe Singer's claims, but is NOT honest enough to say so. Maybe he is afraid of Singer or maybe he just needs Singer on his side as part of his anti-AP agenda.
    He certainly does not understand the math more than he acknowledges!
    I just watched him hold AKJ Rainbow on 8/5 Bonus Poker!
    I can't even think what game in Video Poker that you would actually hold that hold.
    I am sure that one of the VP Games/Strategies call for it but I can't think of one off the top of my head at this moment.
    Although AKJ Rainbow on 8/5 Bonus Poker is a certain mistake.
    I believe someone on this forum has the time to show how much that mistake will cost the player over time.

    This guy posts up 80 hands of him playing and makes 5 mistakes out of 80 hands.
    This is 50 mistakes out of 800 hands!
    This is 500 mistakes out of 8000 hands.
    Imagine if he is playing faster or at his normal speed without video taping!
    I am certain he makes what we would call speed errors not counting his strategy errors.
    This is not someone who understands what he is doing.
    Last edited by monet; 08-19-2018 at 11:39 AM.

  17. #17
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    I am sure that one of the VP Games/Strategies call for it but I can't think of one off the top of my head at this moment.
    Although AKJ Rainbow on 8/5 Bonus Poker is a certain mistake.
    I believe someone on this forum has the time to show how much that mistake will cost the player over time.
    Hi Monet, rainbow JAK can be a hold in All American(USA) Poker since the straight pays 8 for 1 (in full pay AAP or most other variations where the straight pays 8 for 1). JK offsuit has a return of 2.4117 units versus 2.2803 for the JAK rainbow (99.17% 8/5 bonus poker). So for every dollar Alan wagers when he encounters this deal (JcAd8sKs5h), he is losing a little more than 13 cents on average. Not only that, but, as already discussed, the JAK rainbow actually has a lower probability of becoming a non-losing hand after the draw than JK offsuit.
    The most amazing thing though Monet is that, even after reading this, Alan will not change his strategy.

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    I am sure that one of the VP Games/Strategies call for it but I can't think of one off the top of my head at this moment.
    Although AKJ Rainbow on 8/5 Bonus Poker is a certain mistake.
    I believe someone on this forum has the time to show how much that mistake will cost the player over time.
    Hi Monet, rainbow JAK can be a hold in All American(USA) Poker since the straight pays 8 for 1 (in full pay AAP or most other variations where the straight pays 8 for 1). JK offsuit has a return of 2.4117 units versus 2.2803 for the JAK rainbow (99.17% 8/5 bonus poker). So for every dollar Alan wagers when he encounters this deal (JcAd8sKs5h), he is losing a little more than 13 cents on average. Not only that, but, as already discussed, the JAK rainbow actually has a lower probability of becoming a non-losing hand after the draw than JK offsuit.
    The most amazing thing though Monet is that, even after reading this, Alan will not change his strategy.
    Irrelevant. The difference is so small that it has no bearing in a session TODAY. And if you think it makes any difference to a player who sees that hand 20 times a week, that's delusional because the ap's you're talking about play until what they brought to the casino is gone anyway.

    I hold only the Ace in such a deal. Twice on $25 TBP+ I've drawn 3 A's for $30k each time, and $25 vp was not played nearly as much as the lower denoms. So in that "long run" the ap's keep bring up, exactly how much did those two hits cost me again?

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    See I believe (<-my beliefs) that Alan can count to 18. I also believe he understands the math more than he acknowledges. And I believe Alan does not believe Singer's claims, but is NOT honest enough to say so. Maybe he is afraid of Singer or maybe he just needs Singer on his side as part of his anti-AP agenda.
    He certainly does not understand the math more than he acknowledges!
    I just watched him hold AKJ Rainbow on 8/5 Bonus Poker!
    I can't even think what game in Video Poker that you would actually hold that hold.
    I am sure that one of the VP Games/Strategies call for it but I can't think of one off the top of my head at this moment.
    Although AKJ Rainbow on 8/5 Bonus Poker is a certain mistake.
    I believe someone on this forum has the time to show how much that mistake will cost the player over time.
    Not in the mood, besides, it's more fun to think of a game where AKJ Rainbow is the best hold. The correct hold is the lone ace, but on 9/5/5 TDB it's at least pretty close because of the straight.

    I've got it! All-American Video Poker. You know the one, FH-Flush-Straights = 8-8-8. Lots of bizarre holds on that game.

    EDIT: Tableplay brought up All-American already, damn!

    EDIT (AGAIN): It looks like K-J is slightly better on Faces & Deuces, but it's REALLY close, I'm guessing the FH is the difference maker there. Maybe ten-play UX Bonus Streak TDB with no multipliers on any of the current hands? It's a much better multiplier streak for a straight than a 3OaK, and pair/two pair do not give any multiplier streaks at all.
    Last edited by Mission146; 08-20-2018 at 08:36 AM.

  20. #20
    Uh-oh....looks like kew lost again yesterday.

    I find it entertaining when he gets so frustrated that he needs to do the cousin Eddie routine....just as redietz needs to keep typing my real last name. (and now max with his silly camper stuff). Tell me, who else can affect these guys in such ways with his vp success?

    Kew, you need to start paying attention to Alan when he corrects you on the same issue a dozen times. I've never said I've turned -ev play into +ev play. Doing that involves getting in bed with theory instead of reality. EV means nothing to me before and after my session is played. That's your and Mr.V's erroneous claims. And I've never "grinded" my way to profits. That's what you people waste all that time trying to do.

    Did you ever think to yourself that what you're constantly complaining about would completely stop if I said I played only 100.00001 per cent games? And what a ranting hypocrite you'd be because it wouldn't be that tiny positive percentage that made my yearly profits---it's the STRATEGY that does it bozo! Positive or negative means very little when you're trying to win a simple 5 per cent of your bankroll.

    And now we're back to the "oh he can easily win 8 out of 10 sessions using SPS and no doubt he can win today". But how in the heck can he expect a strategy that's sooo easy to win 5 per cent with and that wins so often, be able to show a profit by year's end!? DO YOU EVEN KNOW HOW STUPID THAT SOUNDS coming from a numbers and gambling-oriented person?

    You tell me kew (or anybody else with half a brain): explain how I lose. Explain where all those "at last 8 out of 10's" and "5 per cent is easy to attain" disappear to when my few losing sessions avg. $3k - $4k. And don't just escape this by claiming "but gee Rob, -EV means you lose and +EV means you win".

    You ap's continuously try to convince everyone you always win but you don't "always" win. I need luck and so do you, and if it fails to show then you're stuck with your phantom bucks and chants of "I'm due!"

    I suggest anyone who chooses to criticize this, get an understanding of the strategy first. It makes no sense to simply say it ain't so....then run away from my challenges by claiming "8 of 10 is easy with that method". You either believe what you're saying or you don't.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I need to steal some more electricity for my 3 rv's.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Proving one's claims
    By MisterV in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-23-2018, 12:21 PM
  2. The Package Revisited
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 12-13-2017, 08:41 AM
  3. Quitting When Ahead -- Revisited
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 01-22-2016, 05:36 PM
  4. Quit While You're Ahead... Revisited
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 311
    Last Post: 11-15-2015, 03:14 PM
  5. Dancer Revisited
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-13-2015, 08:11 PM

Posting Permissions

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