Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 200

Thread: Nothing is impossible

  1. #21
    171.6k + 375k = 546.6k

    546.6k/171.6k = 3.18531468531


    Like MaxPen correctly said, Rob would have to triple his initial bankroll and then some in order for all the math to be accurate. Of course, as just about everything Rob says is a load of shit....there's is absolutely zero reason to believe anything he says about his gambling "results" to be anything other than complete make believe.




    AndrewG, you're a moron. The guy claiming a 5% edge on his super count system was pretending to be playing a standard blackjack game. As it turns out, he wasn't playing a standard blackjack game -- he was playing Spanish 21. As many people were suspecting at the time that the guy's claims were (for a lack of better words) impossible, eventually he was found out to be a total. Or maybe I'm thinking of the 70+ y/o degenerate horsebook gambler (sorry Monet, had to throw that #HorseBook in there for ya). Either way, they're both fucking retards and no legitimate (key word: legitimate) AP has anything to do with either of them.
    #FreeTyde

  2. #22
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    171.6k + 375k = 546.6k

    546.6k/171.6k = 3.18531468531


    Like MaxPen correctly said, Rob would have to triple his initial bankroll and then some in order for all the math to be accurate. Of course, as just about everything Rob says is a load of shit....there's is absolutely zero reason to believe anything he says about his gambling "results" to be anything other than complete make believe.




    AndrewG, you're a moron. The guy claiming a 5% edge on his super count system was pretending to be playing a standard blackjack game. As it turns out, he wasn't playing a standard blackjack game -- he was playing Spanish 21. As many people were suspecting at the time that the guy's claims were (for a lack of better words) impossible, eventually he was found out to be a total. Or maybe I'm thinking of the 70+ y/o degenerate horsebook gambler (sorry Monet, had to throw that #HorseBook in there for ya). Either way, they're both fucking retards and no legitimate (key word: legitimate) AP has anything to do with either of them.
    It doesn't happen in a single session. So yeah-after all's said and done there's a total of 500+k- but the starting bankroll was just 171+k.

  3. #23
    Am I the only one who gets this? You start out with a session amount of 57k. You win your $2500 win goal (or more) and leave. You lose 35k one time, but the next trip win, say, 10k. One trip you hit the elusive Royal at $10 level. Yada, yada,yada. At the year's end, you end up with $90k (+or-). Over 3 years- well,hopefully you get it.

  4. #24
    Originally Posted by slingshot View Post
    Am I the only one who gets this? You start out with a session amount of 57k. You win your $2500 win goal (or more) and leave. You lose 35k one time, but the next trip win, say, 10k. One trip you hit the elusive Royal at $10 level. Yada, yada,yada. At the year's end, you end up with $90k (+or-). Over 3 years- well,hopefully you get it.
    Boy-O-boy-O-boy. (note the 2 emojis. One the roll of the eyes as I can't believe this and the second it just makes me sad)

    Slingshot, you don't seem like a bad guy to me. I don't think you are a huckster trying to scam anyone. I think you just don't get it and are gullible enough to be falling for this crap. And that is why I always feel the need to speak out about these different kinds of voodoo, alternative math type claims. And while you are the member who has been open about following this voodoo "system" of Rob's, the fear is that for every "slingshot" there are other lurkers and followers that don't speak up that gets duped and eventually hurt.

    So being that I don't think you are intentionally trying to mislead anyone, I want to ask you a question. You have been following and playing Rob's "system" or a version of Rob's system, off and on for a number of years right? How much are you ahead doing so. And remember I am trusting you to be honest.

  5. #25
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post
    Originally Posted by AxelWolf View Post
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post
    I remember this phrase being very popular: lightning doesn't strike twice in the same place.

    But then someone took a photo of the tower on the Empire State Building during an electrical storm.
    Sure that's a common phrase, it's not supposed to be taken literally, it's just a modern day proverb basically reassuring someone an unlikely bad luck event probably won't happen again. So if that's your argument.... you failed miserably. I don't know why it's so hard to understand a mathematically impossible event vs an event that's extraordinary unlikely. There's a huge difference, one is possible and one isn't.

    It's not even theoretically possible to use a super duper count and gain an overall mathematical 5% advantage. AGAIN, 1+1 can't =5, apparently this guy was making claims that was along those lines.
    I guess I didn't make my points clear.

    First of all I deal in facts, not theory. It's theory when you come upon a crime scene and see three bullet holes in a man's head. It's facts after the coroner determines that the first two wounds were superficial and other evidence proves it was a suicide.

    You Mr AxelWolf used the phrase "along those lines" which tells me you lack facts.

    Mr Kewlj has admitted he has no facts and quotes others and then quotes himself to prove his point.

    To be blunt what a crock of shit this all is. Some of the members here use their own definitions. Others appear to use theory to dispute reported observations. I'll stick with reported observations.

    I remember decades ago going thru the museum at the NYPD Academy. There was a display of a curtain rod that fell out of a high rise apartment window and pierced a pedestrian's skull. The display told the story of the rescue and survival of the victim. What would your theory say?

    I recall seeing bullets that pierced each other in the air. What would your theory say? And in fire fights it happened multiple times. Again, what would your theory say?

    Again, a question I asked previously: is Mr Kewlj never wrong? Then why does he have such problems on some forums?

    If something can happen only once in a trillion times and it happened, then the one in a trillion happened. Deal with it.

    I came here looking for info on casino promotions. My local newspaper does a better job with its weekly Las Vegas column.

    AndrewG, there are two distinct elements to this. First is, what did "Singer" allegedly accomplish? You're correct in that whatever he claims to have done was not theoretically "impossible." It was just highly, highly unlikely. Like winning the lottery. The more important element, to me, is that he claims his systems will (not can or may, but will) produce similar results for others going forward. Putting aside the problem that "Singer" makes an understanding of his "systems" a moving target with intricacies only he can interpret in-the-field (red flag number one), this claim is not a historical possibility question. It is a math question. And there is no math that supports it. Can one out of a thousand people following his "systems" generate similar positive results? Sure, that can happen. Will the "systems" work, in total, counting all results for everyone using them going forward? No, they will not. That is math. It would be like a lottery winner (historical event) saying they have a system that will win (not can or may) going forward. Same thing. Now if you think that you are blessed by God (or "Singer") and you'll be the one in a thousand who wins going forward, more power to you. We should all be blessed by God.

    Another example. The most sports bets I have ever won consecutively was 17. It was in a public contest, online, with my actual plays. I wrote a couple of articles for that website after I hit 13 in a row. In one I said that I was shooting for 17 in a row because those were the same odds, as established by insurance companies, as "death by reptile." It was in print, viewed by thousands of people, and the plays could be seen before the games were played. It was an established accomplishment, unlike the accomplishments claimed by "Singer." It was a historical event. Do I go around saying my brilliant expertise will do that again? Of course not. It's absurd. That was a historical anomaly. I will probably never do that again. It was the very definition of a once-in-a-lifetime thing.

    Anyone can win the lottery. Winning the lottery is not impossible, by definition. Should you give credence to the lottery winner claiming "systems" were responsible? That is the key question.

    For casino promotions, yeah, tough to come by these days. I took some criticism from the high muck-a-mucks here a few years back for lugging a boatload of coins into Ellis island to get a 10% bonus. I did it twice, and I'd do it again if they still had the promo. The Las Vegas Advisor current issue lists a rebate opportunity and the usual -- Ellis island $10 steak and so on. Check it out if you haven't read this month's issue. Also, the online sports book Draft Kings is offering a $500 rebate on a first losing wager for those states in which they have now set up shop. So check that out, also.

  6. #26
    Now, while I wait for slingshot's answer to my above inquiry, I will try once again.

    Gambling game of chance offered by casinos are negative expectation. PERIOD. There is some sort of house advantage built into every game, unless some sort of mistake has occurred with the many new games (mostly table games). Occasionally somebody screws up and there is a way to beat a new game, but it doesn't last long. So let's go back to there is a house advantage on every game, making every game -EV, that is negative expectation off the top.

    Now since the dawn of gambling, people have been trying to figure out how to overcome negative expectation with a betting system, Including some of the greatest math minds of the times. It can't be done. There is no betting system that can overcome negative expectation in the long run. Short run sure. Play 100 spins on Roulette betting black. You may get lucky and have 55, maybe 60 blacks hit and walk away a short term winning. But bet black on 100 spins everyday for a year (longterm) and you are guaranteed to lose. I am going to say this again, because this is the biggie: There is no betting system that can overcome negative expectation in the long run. This is proven fact. If you can't or won't accept this, then you are just a guy who still believes the earth is flat.

    Now, you and Rob give some examples of how Rob could have won. He happened to get lucky and hit more than his share of highend Royals. Well that is not a winning system. That is a gambler getting lucky. That occurs every day in every casinos. And here is the important line of this discussion. If a player is going to get lucky (short-term) then he is going to get lucky. The betting system didn't do a damn thing. If a player is going to get lucky and hit more than his share of Royals in a short time, he will be ahead, flat betting. That is just luck, or the proper term, variance. This happens everyday....short term. But these results CAN NOT hold up into the longterm, and years, 4 or 10, even only playing once a week, qualifies as longterm. You simply cannot defy the odds and math like that over a longer period of time.

    To be a longterm winning player, a player needs something that turns the initial negative expectation in his favor, resulting in more that 100% return. Then it is just a matter of getting in a lot of play, to get to the long-term and away from short term, where there variance swings can occur. There are many ways to turn a negative game off the top, in to a +EV game. I mostly use card counting, but I have used other methods as well like holecarding, disproportionate mailers on VP, clocking the big six wheel, matchplays and free bets and other promo offers. For the past few months I have been doing something totally new (for me), that I am not yet ready to discuss. These are a many things that can turn -EV into +EV, but betting system isn't one of them. The really smart and advance guys, like Grosjean and Munchkin, and many others, do things, I can't even comprehend. But there has to be something that turns the game from -EV to +EV. And then you just play lots of trials to get to the long run.

    But anybody telling you of any 'betting system' that overcomes -EV is living in a fantasy world and they are pulling your leg.
    Last edited by kewlJ; 11-20-2019 at 10:08 AM.

  7. #27
    I regret that I am unfamiliar with the specific issues being discussed here. I do not know about Mr Singer and his bankroll and returns. I do not know about the blackjack player and his specific claims. But again I was just trying to use real world examples of strange suicides from multiple gunshots that what appears to be impossible might in fact be not only possible but factual.

    I would just suggest to all of you that you should be careful rushing to judgment. Yes, a suicide can take three bullets to the head and so forth. And so I would not be surprised that someone has a huge edge or better returns gambling than what is commonly believed.

    Mr Kewlj insists no one can overcome negative expectation in the long run. How do you know that? Is it because in theory it says that? Would your world fall apart if someone finished with a profit after forty years of casino visits?

    Believe me, there were members of the press who reported that a man in Central New York must have been murdered because he took three shotgun blasts in the back. But it was a suicide and forensic tests proved it. Just as they proved three shots to the head in another case. And just as bullets collided and pierced each other in mid air during fire fights.

    Have an open mind. Lightning strikes the same place frequently.
    Last edited by AndrewG; 11-20-2019 at 10:16 AM.

  8. #28
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post
    I regret that I am unfamiliar with the specific issues being discussed here. I do not know about Mr Singer and his bankroll and returns. I do not know about the blackjack player and his specific claims. But again I was just trying to use real world examples of strange suicides from multiple gunshots that what appears to be impossible might in fact be not only possible but factual.

    I would just suggest to all of you that you should be careful rushing to judgment. Yes, a suicide can take three bullets to the head and so forth. And so I would not be surprised that someone has a huge edge or better returns gambling than what is commonly believed.
    I don't know why you are repeatedly using this suicide example. It is completely unrelatable.

    I mean if you want to quibble that I say impossible, when there is a .0000001% chance of something occurring, go for it. In the Gambling world that is impossible. And when a repeat offender makes claim after claim of these impossible (or all but impossible) claims for decades....well I don't know why any of us waste another second on him.

  9. #29
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post
    I regret that I am unfamiliar with the specific issues being discussed here. I do not know about Mr Singer and his bankroll and returns. I do not know about the blackjack player and his specific claims. But again I was just trying to use real world examples of strange suicides from multiple gunshots that what appears to be impossible might in fact be not only possible but factual.

    I would just suggest to all of you that you should be careful rushing to judgment. Yes, a suicide can take three bullets to the head and so forth. And so I would not be surprised that someone has a huge edge or better returns gambling than what is commonly believed.
    I don't know why you are repeatedly using this suicide example. It is completely unrelatable.
    It's because so many people both police and in the press swore they couldn't be suicides with multiple shots to the head and back, but they were.

    Why Mr Kewlj do you insist no one can beat a negative expectation game? Because you read it somewhere? What if one person did? Would your world crumble?

    I'd venture to say there may be many people in the world who have a lifetime of casino profits despite anything and everything you read and believe. That doesn't mean you or I could repeat it, however.

  10. #30
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post

    Why Mr Kewlj do you insist no one can beat a negative expectation game? Because you read it somewhere? What if one person did? Would your world crumble?

    I'd venture to say there may be many people in the world who have a lifetime of casino profits despite anything and everything you read and believe. That doesn't mean you or I could repeat it, however.
    Well what if I just flap my arms, jump off the nearest cliff and try to fly. No one has ever succeeded in doing so. But who is to say it can't be done.

  11. #31
    Not sure what a Clinton Foundation sponsored forensic analysis has to do with anything.

  12. #32
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post
    I regret that I am unfamiliar with the specific issues being discussed here. I do not know about Mr Singer and his bankroll and returns. I do not know about the blackjack player and his specific claims. But again I was just trying to use real world examples of strange suicides from multiple gunshots that what appears to be impossible might in fact be not only possible but factual.

    I would just suggest to all of you that you should be careful rushing to judgment. Yes, a suicide can take three bullets to the head and so forth. And so I would not be surprised that someone has a huge edge or better returns gambling than what is commonly believed.
    I don't know why you are repeatedly using this suicide example. It is completely unrelatable.

    I mean if you want to quibble that I say impossible, when there is a .0000001% chance of something occurring, go for it. In the Gambling world that is impossible. And when a repeat offender makes claim after claim of these impossible (or all but impossible) claims for decades....well I don't know why any of us waste another second on him.
    Allow me to turn this around. Why waste another second on this, including on you Mr Kewlj? You haven't observed every casino player over their lifetime. All you've done is parrot some theory you've read.

    Frankly what does it matter. People have won the lottery and for the rest of us life just goes on. Someone else wins at video poker or blackjack or craps and defies the odds and for the rest of us life just goes on.

    Why obsess over it? You can't do anything about it.

  13. #33
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post

    Allow me to turn this around. Why waste another second on this, including on you Mr Kewlj? You haven't observed every casino player over their lifetime. All you've done is parrot some theory you've read.

    Frankly what does it matter. People have won the lottery and for the rest of us life just goes on. Someone else wins at video poker or blackjack or craps and defies the odds and for the rest of us life just goes on.

    Why obsess over it? You can't do anything about it.
    Yes I have read everything on winning gambling (advantage play) that I could find. That happens to be how one learns, so I don't know why you keep dismissing that. And then, I have lived it. I am finishing my 16th year of supporting myself from advantage play, mostly card counting, but some other things mixed in a little along the way. My apologies to my fellow AP's that don't like to consider card counting as real advantage play.

    Andrew math is everything. Everything in life is about math, even things you don't associate. The automobile runs because of math.

    And gambling, playing with an advantage as well as negative expectation gambling is certainly all about math.

    I just said I have read everything I can find on advantage play, in particular card counting. But most of that didn't come from books as you keep alluding to. Most of that can from different forums and networking opportunities arising from participating on these forums. That is where what knowledge I have came from, other people sharing their experiences and then me going out and making my experiences for 16 years now.

    So why obsess over it? I don't like it when people come to these forums and make claims that are mathematically impossible that mislead and can hurt other players. I learned from other players sharing real experience based on real math, and I simply don't like it when someone spews phony claims, based on alternative math, that can harm other players. I don't like it at all!

    Now I don't call out every case I see or suspect. There is some responsibility for players to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking. But every once in a while, someone comes along like Mr. Singer here, or T3 on the blackjack forum, with his super duper count that is sooo convincing, with their alternative math, and misdirects, and "muddying the waters", that you can literally see some members falling for it. I believe true advantage players, have not only a right but a responsibility to call "Bullshit"!

    And not all AP's share my view. Many of my fellow AP's will say nothing. Self preservation. What do they care is some naïve person gets hurt. The last thing in the world they want to do is create more AP, more competition. That is fine. Their right. But I am going to continue to call out the most egregious of these ridiculous misleading claims.

  14. #34
    Imagine living life as kew claims he does. He runs around to all the forums, eventually getting banned for making up stuff about himself and spewing hate upon anyone who either challenges him or doesn't believe his nonsense. Then the lies, more lies, and the hurt comes out. He can't even see how meaningless all of this is to people who, unlike him, have useful, productive lives. He claims to "care" about what others claim...so much so that if it doesn't line up exactly to how his defective mind sees things or if there is no praise for him, he "doesn't like it". Translation: whatever anyone else says might get more attention than the very weak and confidence-lacking person that is he. A tortured life, indeed.

  15. #35
    Originally Posted by MaxPen View Post
    Originally Posted by slingshot View Post
    Originally Posted by MaxPen View Post

    I thought the claim was a 375k profit. That would require tripling the initial bankroll and then some. Just trying to get the details.
    Uhhhh,no. Triple is over $500,000. I love people who go by the.math.
    Well, if you start with 171.6k and claim to have made a profit of 375k. What would your ending amount be...lol
    Yet he wants to ask only if it's possible to double the starting bankroll. I'm trying to figure out the question that needs to be answered.
    Claims that are highly questionable always seem to be surrounded in clouded descriptions and lacking in detail. I love people who are idiots.
    All you're showing is not having or caring about an understanding of what's been said. I'll explain it YET AGAIN for the slow ones. (and this is especially for RS__, who like redietz, usually jumps at my posts without really knowing much about the substance at all).

    The bankroll I used for playing starting in 2000 was $171,600. Simple enuf, right? My per-session bankroll was $57,200. 3 times that amount is $171,600 which as explained many times, was what I wanted to have just in case the strategy--which relied heavily upon getting high paying hands in higher denominations--experienced a devastating loss or two, which it never did other than one $33,000 loss.

    Next, when I stated "double the starting bankroll" that simply means what the actual ending result was. Had I played it for 8 years instead of 4 and the profit ended up being $750,000, the wording would have said "quadruple the starting bankroll".

    From what I'm seeing, people who want to be critical of what I say are very similar to the democrats who try so hard to criticize and debunk what impeachment witnesses favorable to Trump are doing. They don't really understand facts, so they turn to guessing, theory, and spin in order to claim their desired points.

    The edit here is to ask WTF did RS__ multiply my total gambling bankroll by 3 for, and why did he use an addition and division of non-related numbers??

    This is how the stupid people respond when they have no idea what they or anyone else is talking about.
    AmI REALLY even more intelligent and capable than previously believed than this poorly organized collection of self-proclaimed "professional gamblers" here?
    Last edited by Rob.Singer; 11-20-2019 at 11:57 AM.

  16. #36
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Imagine living life as kew claims he does. He runs around to all the forums, eventually getting banned for making up stuff about himself and spewing hate upon anyone who either challenges him or doesn't believe his nonsense. Then the lies, more lies, and the hurt comes out. He can't even see how meaningless all of this is to people who, unlike him, have useful, productive lives. He claims to "care" about what others claim...so much so that if it doesn't line up exactly to how his defective mind sees things or if there is no praise for him, he "doesn't like it". Translation: whatever anyone else says might get more attention than the very weak and confidence-lacking person that is he. A tortured life, indeed.
    This is what Rob does. He is a master troll.....I'll give him that. Deflect and muddy the waters. He attacks anyone who dares challenge his alternative math and impossible claims. Usually attacks so personal and nasty it serves to discourage others how may voice an opinion. THIS has been Rob's M.O. For years, even decades.

    But here's the thing Rob, I don't care. I don't care what names you call me. I am still here aren't I. I have dealt with bullies my who life.

    You can say whatever you want Rob. Use whatever trolling and bullying tactics you want. But it doesn't change anything.

    And it doesn't change this:

    https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...ems-claim-poll

    https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...le-up-bug-poll

  17. #37
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Imagine living life as kew claims he does. He runs around to all the forums, eventually getting banned for making up stuff about himself and spewing hate upon anyone who either challenges him or doesn't believe his nonsense. Then the lies, more lies, and the hurt comes out. He can't even see how meaningless all of this is to people who, unlike him, have useful, productive lives. He claims to "care" about what others claim...so much so that if it doesn't line up exactly to how his defective mind sees things or if there is no praise for him, he "doesn't like it". Translation: whatever anyone else says might get more attention than the very weak and confidence-lacking person that is he. A tortured life, indeed.
    This is what Rob does. He is a master troll.....I'll give him that. Deflect and muddy the waters. He attacks anyone who dares challenge his alternative math and impossible claims. Usually attacks so personal and nasty it serves to discourage others how may voice an opinion. THIS has been Rob's M.O. For years, even decades.

    But here's the thing Rob, I don't care. I don't care what names you call me. I am still here aren't I. I have dealt with bullies my who life.

    You can say whatever you want Rob. Use whatever trolling and bullying tactics you want. But it doesn't change anything.

    And it doesn't change this:

    https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...ems-claim-poll

    https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...le-up-bug-poll
    This is FUN is it not? Can you just IMAGINE the amount of anxiety and pills....and strain on his weak, defective heart....this internet clown is experiencing over such INSIGNIFICANT STUFF!! Hahahaha

  18. #38
    Mr Kewlj please help me out here. Do you agree that it is possible to win money at a negative expectation game, or is it your position that you cannot win money at a negative expectation game?

    I'm trying to understand your definition of mathematically impossible.

  19. #39
    Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post
    Mr Kewlj please help me out here. Do you agree that it is possible to win money at a negative expectation game, or is it your position that you cannot win money at a negative expectation game?

    I'm trying to understand your definition of mathematically impossible.
    Of course it is possible to win money at negative expectation game....in the short run. It occurs hundreds of times a day in every casino.

    Furthermore one of those short term wins could be so large that it even wipes out a whole lot of losing, say a progressive jackpot win of a couple million, could wipe out several years of losing. BUT that doesn't make it a winning play! And it doesn't make it a winning system, as Rob here claims and has claimed for years and decades.

  20. #40
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post

    This is FUN is it not? Can you just IMAGINE the amount of anxiety and pills....and strain on his weak, defective heart....this internet clown is experiencing over such INSIGNIFICANT STUFF!! Hahahaha
    Yep, it is fun. Gives you something to do between the time your grandkids change your adult diapers.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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