Of Math and Men

[Vegas Vic]

The more hands you play at lower levels and lose money,the greater the chance that you will hit a large hand at higher levels.

The machine doesn't know and doesn't care how you have been playing. If this is indeed your thinking and your approach, you really shouldn't be playing.

[Vegas Vic]

I paid for and read a tell-all book from a former slot/poker machine manager.He states that when a series of winning results occur when players first begin playing it has the desired effect of "hooking" the player into believing the machine is "friendly" and on the verge of bigger and better things.How many players would walk away from a winning series of results when they first begin playing.Most players will stay at a machine that gives them something right away.The casinos knows this and adjust the programming of their machines to fit this behavior.These programs are called "builds" which he states he was present for as these programs were upgraded or changed.Are they completely random????

The only person who wins anything with these "tell all" books is the author who suckered you into buying it.

[antfanas]

The machine doesn't know and doesn't care how you have been playing. If this is indeed your thinking and your approach, you really shouldn't be playing.

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.Thanks for the advice

[antfanas]

The only person who wins anything with these "tell all" books is the author who suckered you into buying it.

Do you have any for sale?

[jatki]

Now we're getting somewhere.

[Rob.Singer]

Vic, I KNOW vp machines at least in Nv. are not random, and I've never even considered not playing them because of that. The fact I found out was, that even after several billion hands run into the test equipment, it couldn't be determined whether being slightly non-random helps or hurts the player.

[Vegas Vic]

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.Thanks for the advice

More than just one man's opinion. The chances of hitting at any level are the same. Past results are no indication of future results. In hindsight, you can say "look what happened", but to turn it around and say "look what's going to happen" is foolish.

Do you have any for sale?

How much more money are you willing to waste?

Vic, I KNOW vp machines at least in Nv. are not random, and I've never even considered not playing them because of that. The fact I found out was, that even after several billion hands run into the test equipment, it couldn't be determined whether being slightly non-random helps or hurts the player.

I KNOW they are random.

[Alan Mendelson]

I'm going to say I don't know that the machines are random. I certainly hope they are random -- as advertised. But I would certainly welcome someone's proof that they are not random. And until I can see proof that they are not random, I'm just going to have to believe that they are random.

If you believe the machines are not random -- then follow your beliefs. It's your money.

[arcimede$]

I paid for and read a tell-all book from a former slot/poker machine manager.He states that when a series of winning results occur when players first begin playing it has the desired effect of "hooking" the player into believing the machine is "friendly" and on the verge of bigger and better things.How many players would walk away from a winning series of results when they first begin playing.Most players will stay at a machine that gives them something right away.The casinos knows this and adjust the programming of their machines to fit this behavior.These programs are called "builds" which he states he was present for as these programs were upgraded or changed.Are they completely random????

Of course this is against the regulations in every state and there's absolutely no logic for the machine manufacturers to make machines like this. What's in it for them?

However, even if you assume this was true it would work against a system like SPS. The only thing that would take advantage is to have small win goals and get off the machine as soon as you hit them. Naturally, you should be able to move to another machine and do the same thing again. In fact, you should be able to do this over and over again just by moving from one machine to another.

You should be able to test this theory yourself instead of relying on someone who probably doesn't have a clue.

[slingshot]

I paid for and read a tell-all book from a former slot/poker machine manager.He states that when a series of winning results occur when players first begin playing it has the desired effect of "hooking" the player into believing the machine is "friendly" and on the verge of bigger and better things.How many players would walk away from a winning series of results when they first begin playing.Most players will stay at a machine that gives them something right away.The casinos knows this and adjust the programming of their machines to fit this behavior.These programs are called "builds" which he states he was present for as these programs were upgraded or changed.Are they completely random????

That is interesting and explains an interesting phenomenon I observed on "off days"at casinos and was one of the criteria I used in just playing 20 hands bp/ddbp each (100 credits) instead of the regular strategy. Also, using this on aart led to $10-15 wins in sometimes 3-4 hands.

[Rob.Singer]

More than just one man's opinion. The chances of hitting at any level are the same. Past results are no indication of future results. In hindsight, you can say "look what happened", but to turn it around and say "look what's going to happen" is foolish.



How much more money are you willing to waste?



I KNOW they are random.

There's a big difference Vic. You're relying on what the casino industry and local government agencies tells you, as are the advantage play crowd. You have no facts. I do, in support of what I say, and if Alan wanted to come with me last year to see the reports and if he had put his findings up here, all we'd be arguing about is arci's predictable new claims of how I had all the computerized test equipment summaries made up for this specific and elaborate scam.

[Rob.Singer]

I'm going to say I don't know that the machines are random. I certainly hope they are random -- as advertised. But I would certainly welcome someone's proof that they are not random. And until I can see proof that they are not random, I'm just going to have to believe that they are random.

If you believe the machines are not random -- then follow your beliefs. It's your money.

Alan, those are very smart and valid statements...ones which I always made for the years before I tested the machine.

[Rob.Singer]

Thank you Allan for the welcome.I have now lowered my session win goal to $125 which is 2500x.05 my lowest denomination as Mr Singer suggests .Alan I don't care whose system/method is the best as long as I leave the casino with more $ than I came in with.
I am not an expert on SPS and have questions for Mr Singer.You win your goal in increments or possibly on one hand for instance a .05 RF for $200.00. The more hands you play at lower levels and lose money,the greater the chance that you will hit a large hand at higher levels.For example I played through .05/.10/.25 BP and DDBP
and had no 40 credit cash outs so I was behind $160($20/$40/$100). I began the next level playing .50 BP and won 220 credits($110) soft profit.This could not get me back to the .25BP level as I needed to win $120 or 240 credits.I was $10 short.I continued to play .50 BP and lost the 100 credits.I then stated to play 300 credits on a game called double crown poker which pays 800 for 4A and 600 for quad K,Q,J. I was down 100 credits and then hit 4A.Total win was $400-$50-$50+$110-$160=$250 Profit.You must have a plan and stick to it.

And that's EXACTLY how the strategy was designed to work & has worked for me on such a consistent basis, and will work for anyone who applies it as it's supposed to be played. And it will produce even more winning sessions once you understand where and when to use the special plays I've developed that INCREASE session ER. It is a mathematical concept that will always drive unknowledgeable players crazy until the day comes where they really want to understand it instead of just sitting there like foolish know-it-alls claiming it's hogwash, ie, taking the easy way out.

[arcimede$]

There's a big difference Vic. You're relying on what the casino industry and local government agencies tells you, as are the advantage play crowd. You have no facts. I do, in support of what I say, and if Alan wanted to come with me last year to see the reports and if he had put his findings up here, all we'd be arguing about is arci's predictable new claims of how I had all the computerized test equipment summaries made up for this specific and elaborate scam.

You have no facts. If you did you would provide them. All you do is make claims you can't back up. Better known as lies.

[Rob.Singer]

Arci, would YOU like to commit to going with me to Az. sometime this winter to collect everything that will make you look like an even bigger liar--if that's even possible? Oh wait....you're latest escape route has you being stuck, unable to do anything or go anywhere. But let me know when you're freed up please.

[jatki]

I'll go if it's at a convenient time. I wouldn't be capable of reviewing them because I have no math background, but I'd be able to repeat what I saw and we can maybe bring some of it back?

Arc, like has been said a dozen or more times, no one makes more ridiculous claims on here or anywhere else without the slightest bit of backup for them, than you. And you say you only use facts?
Backup your winning claims, backup again how Singer made me use his card in training, backup your claims that he lost that inheritance you keep spouting off about on the forums, backup anything. What you can't? What's that say about you?

[Vegas Vic]

There's a big difference Vic. You're relying on what the casino industry and local government agencies tells you, as are the advantage play crowd. You have no facts. I do, in support of what I say, and if Alan wanted to come with me last year to see the reports and if he had put his findings up here, all we'd be arguing about is arci's predictable new claims of how I had all the computerized test equipment summaries made up for this specific and elaborate scam.

It's not up to Alan to supply such documentation. You are the individual making the assertion. If one is to believe that you have such material merely because you say so, then it's equally believable that I have the facts to sustain what I say. After all, everything on the internet is true.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, even if your one machine that you tested proved to not have been valid, there is no way that your single machine test could be used either in a court of law, or by the media to challenge the video poker industry. One sample machine, one test done in your garage, is not sufficient proof. You would only have the proof of one machine.

This is why I suggested that an independent third party such as Consumers Union (Consumer Reports Magazine) or the Federal Trade Commission or the Attorney General or someone other than "Rob Singer, video poker author and expert player" conduct their own test on multiple machines in laboratory conditions.

You might have absolute proof, but the fact that it comes from one machine, tested at home, will not convince anyone. You might "have something" but at this point it is not evidence that anyone could use to "start the ball rolling."

By the way, I did send a message to Consumers Union suggesting an investigation into this and I did not get a response.

[arcimede$]

Arci, would YOU like to commit to going with me to Az. sometime this winter to collect everything that will make you look like an even bigger liar--if that's even possible? Oh wait....you're latest escape route has you being stuck, unable to do anything or go anywhere. But let me know when you're freed up please.

If you want to have credibility it is up to you to provide the data that supports your claims. YOUR CLAIMS ... not anyone else. It has nothing to do with me. By not providing it you are admitting it doesn't exist (which I already knew).

[Rob.Singer]

It's not up to Alan to supply such documentation. You are the individual making the assertion. If one is to believe that you have such material merely because you say so, then it's equally believable that I have the facts to sustain what I say. After all, everything on the internet is true.

You're misreading this Vic. I never asked Alan to supply my documentation. I simply explained what I did to prove out a belief to myself, Alan asked to see that proof because he sensibly can't really believe machines aren't random without some kind of proof, and I said I'd bring him to the documentation. That way there could be no 3rd party stupid claims that I just created the paperwork in the last two weeks.

You also missed where it was never my intention to do anything but present my findings to the NGC upon proving it out to myself, but I repidly discovered they wanted no part of it. To me, that is a tell-all of tell-alls. But I also found out that whenever I mentioned this effort on my site or afterwards, on forums, certain disbelievers couldnt't let it go and wanted to see.more....until it got too close to really happening, that is. Then, just as with the revenue-protecting Gaming Commission, the doors shut just as quickly as they opened.

BTW, I've said where I got my facts to sustain my "assertion"; where'd you get yours? On the Internet?