Originally Posted by
Alan Mendelson
I'm sorry but you lost me as soon as I read roulette. Roulette is not video poker and Rob doesn't pick cards randomly.
Now if he's a 6/5 favorite over ten sessions why isn't he also a 6/5 favorite over 100 sessions or 1,000 sessions?
Please no coin flips or roulette spins.
I try to use other games to make the concept easier to understand for you, because you have difficulty grasping gambling concepts as it is.
Okay, Singer's claim is that his system works. If you really wanted to test his system, here is what you would do:
There are no, "Sessions," except as Singer sees fit, but no set amount of, "Sessions."
What you would do is set a target amount, preferably more than one Royal at the $100 level. I would suggest $1,000,000, which I certainly do not have. How it would work is that Singer would have to play his system (or could play however he wanted, really) until he either won $1,000,000 or lost $1,000,000. If he were to meet/exceed $1,000,000, then the person betting against him would pay an additional $1,000,000. If Singer were to lose $1,000,000, then he would need to pay another $1,000,000 to the person betting against him.
The reason why Singer's, "System," has such a high probability of winning a given trial is because the win target is so small compared to the loss target. If his win goal were to go from $2,500/session to $500/session, the probability of a, "Session Win," would be even higher. If he made the win target $5/session, then it would be even higher still.
Anyway, if you set the stop win and stop loss to the same amount, and you make it a relatively high amount relative to the highest individual bet Singer is allowed to make, then the probability of winning would be well against him unless he were playing a +EV game in the first place.