Rob Singer's Single-Play Strategy COMMENT HERE

[jatki]

I read through all this when I got back from San Diego last night but was too tired to comment. By the way I did stop in at Caesars Rincon but thought I'd never find it after driving those curves and little hills in my p/u on the way there. I sat at a little bar next to a restaurant and won $60 in 30 minutes and left. Holy Moly I won again on those losing machines that seem to be everywhere!

I know Rob's coming here for his input in early November but here's my take as his student. He taught me this strategy an Alan, you really can play it if you either want to do it in pennies through dollars, or as he told me, in variations starting at any denomination and ending at any denomination, but he said he only ran his numbers for the denominations and in between ratios that he plays. I did call him this morning after reading all the questions and comments you had. He said the expectation was for him to initially give you the strategy which is what was requested, that doesn't include backup math or expantions or why this and why that, just the strategy as played. He knows there'd be a lot of commentary and questions and he said he'd answer them one by one when he gets back on. I see why there's some confusion and even I have a question from what I read. Other than arc who seems to always have a hair on his butt agenda, it seems being critical of what he posted when that is spot on what he was asked to post, is premature. I'd also like to see the arrt system details and told him so because that is what I play most.

Redetz where did you get the thought that he sold this strategy or system to anyone? Have you seen me say he showed me it for free? He also told me if anyone would play exactly as he does then they would win as regularly and profitably as he does. He said any deviation that he did not analize is an unknown as far as he's concerned. That makes it pretty clear. Why all the what ifs.

[redietz]

I did not mean "sell" in the capitalist sense; I meant "sell" in the propaganda sense.

[Alan Mendelson]

I did not mean "sell" in the capitalist sense; I meant "sell" in the propaganda sense.

Does "sell" also include the "first Amendment, free speech" sense?

[arcimede$]

I doubt anyone would buy the book. First of all most people wouldn't believe it ... which is the where all the smart money would be.

[redietz]

Rob has every right to try to convince anyone, even website owners and journalists, that what he says is true, even if he knows it to be complete rubbish. He has every right to claim anything he likes. All propaganda is protected under free speech. It boils down to what he can sell (in the propaganda sense) to what audience. If the audience is sufficiently underinformed, gullible, or in need of a savior, he has every right to fool the little buggers.

[Alan Mendelson]

And what about Bob Dancer's various claims about turning six thousand into a million dollars?

[arcimede$]

And what about Bob Dancer's various claims about turning six thousand into a million dollars?

Last I checked Dancer was living in a nice house and driving some fancy cars. We now know that Singer's claims of owning a big house was a lie and we don't know about his car claims.

[redietz]

Both Dancer and Singer may be writing about the fictional adventures of fictional characters. It's clear, in addition, that Dancer's girlfriend actually won the big royal, not Dancer.

[bigfoot66]

Both Dancer and Singer may be writing about the fictional adventures of fictional characters. It's clear, in addition, that Dancer's girlfriend actually won the big royal, not Dancer.

Well but they are married now and she was playing his strategy and with his money. The fact that she hit the button instead of Dancer is of little consequence.

[regnis]

Tell that to the guy who's wife ran off with the winning lottery ticket.

[redietz]

Bigfoot -- they are married now. But question -- how do you know whose money was used? Whose money was being used when is glossed over at most points in his book. In addition, it's not "his" strategy.

And there is the additional anecdote that, post-close-of-the-book, he gave back 40 or 50% of that money back to the same casino.

[Alan Mendelson]

living in a nice house and driving some fancy cars.

I know lots of people who live in nice houses and drive fancy cars including Bentleys and Ferraris... and they're all broke. How one "lives" is not a true indication of wealth.

I play craps at Caesars with an elderly man who wears old black shoes, and a long black overcoat. He looks poor. Very poor. Unshaved, ungroomed. Except that he only plays with black chips ($100) and his average bet on the table is about two-thousand dollars, and his pockets are filled with black chips.

[Vegas Vic]

I know lots of people who live in nice houses and drive fancy cars including Bentleys and Ferraris... and they're all broke. How one "lives" is not a true indication of wealth.

I play craps at Caesars with an elderly man who wears old black shoes, and a long black overcoat. He looks poor. Very poor. Unshaved, ungroomed. Except that he only plays with black chips ($100) and his average bet on the table is about two-thousand dollars, and his pockets are filled with black chips.

Sounds like it was Tyrone F. Horneigh

[arcimede$]

I know lots of people who live in nice houses and drive fancy cars including Bentleys and Ferraris... and they're all broke. How one "lives" is not a true indication of wealth.

I play craps at Caesars with an elderly man who wears old black shoes, and a long black overcoat. He looks poor. Very poor. Unshaved, ungroomed. Except that he only plays with black chips ($100) and his average bet on the table is about two-thousand dollars, and his pockets are filled with black chips.

Once again you're confusing possibilities with probabilities. There are exceptions to most rules, one shouldn't live by those exceptions. In most cases if it walks like a duck ... I think you know the rest.

[Alan Mendelson]

I have an example of where the probability = the possibility = the reality.

Arcimede$ is out to get Singer.

[arcimede$]

I have an example of where the probability = the possibility = the reality.

Arcimede$ is out to get Singer.

Wrong again, all I do is provide the facts.

[Vegas Vic]

Wrong again, all I do is provide the facts.

The facts will "get Singer" as long as the facts are indeed facts and not merely opinion. For all of the shortage of substantiation on Rob's side of the ledger, there's not a whole lot on your side either. Simply telling us that "(insert something pertaining to Rob)" appeared in a previous publication, on the internet years ago, or through some research you might have done, is not automatically providing a fact.

[arcimede$]

The facts will "get Singer" as long as the facts are indeed facts and not merely opinion. For all of the shortage of substantiation on Rob's side of the ledger, there's not a whole lot on your side either. Simply telling us that "(insert something pertaining to Rob)" appeared in a previous publication, on the internet years ago, or through some research you might have done, is not automatically providing a fact.

They may not be facts that you have personally verified, that does not mean they are not facts.

[Alan Mendelson]

Actually, the "facts" might have no bearing on the discussion. Frankly, what does it matter where he lives, what color house, what color RV, or what color shoes does he have as it pertains to his video poker strategy? It doesn't.

If you want to argue his personal finances being an issue, I can quickly come up with five arguments why his personal finances are unrelated to his video poker claims of success:

1. the bankruptcy happened before he started with his system
2. he chose to live modestly and bank his winnings
3. he hid the ownership of his homes in corporations or under the names of relatives
4. he does not need to own anything as a sign of wealth
5. that storage locker in New Mexico is loaded with cash that will be uncovered in the next episode of Storage Wars because he forgot to pay the rent on it just as he forgot to pay the rental fees on the "mail drop" address he had in Arizona

[slingshot]

I don't think anyone is going to find the ''facts" on a document. Actually playing the machines is "fact". If nothing else, just think of the logic of it. If you keep up with your play, assuming you don't just bang away at the buttons, what's wrong with making a "special play" that breaks from the "correct" play if that play will cover the losses and come away with a profit? And how could you constantly do it without an increase in denomination? And why would you think that after success you could sit there and play on and on thinking that you can beat the machines any time you want?