Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
And there's a reason. Your "mission" here has been to attack Rob Singer from day 1. Rob is gone. I don't know where, but he's gone. I'm next on your hit list. I don't know who is next.

Your comments rarely include facts. You cite studies and constantly refer to the same study about addicted gaming as if that is supposed to answer all questions.

Here, in this thread. we have a claim that someone got a new players card from Total Rewards, earned 1,000 tier points and received "thousands in free play." You have never addressed that, and I think you missed the claim because anyone who read it would realize it just doesn't make sense.

No matter what books and studies you might quote, it just doesn't make sense. I'm not afraid to say it.

This has nothing to do with the idea that being absent from a casino might make a casino give you "come back offers." I have benefited from "come back offers." But what was posted here is just off the wall.
First of all, I agree with virtually everything Rob had to say regarding casinos and how to interact with them except for his insistence that his self-designed strategies, win goals, and loss limits somehow outperform optimal play. That stuff was silly.

Second, my main interest in this forum had to do with the interaction between a respected journalist and a paranormal claimant (Rob). Rob thought he could circumvent the laws of probability through his ingenious strategies and discipline. It was a classic interaction, as someone who was intelligent, had some investigative experience, and some gambling background assumed they could evaluate gambling claims. Being bamboozled is nothing to be ashamed of -- check out the SRI lab and Uri Geller. But being bamboozled and sticking to one's guns without actually checking with experts (mathematicians) is something else. It's also bizarre to pull out a BS Meter for certain claims (of the three-legged squirrel variety) and leave the BS Meter in the closet for other claims (of the flying pink elephant variety). I don't know whether to apply the word "naive" or "hubris" more; I think hubris fits the bill better.

Fortunately, Alan does not own the forum any longer, and Rob realizes the jig is up, so I can take a break from the weirdness. That relationship, however, was absolutely classic.

And by the way, Schull's book is not "a study" about machine addiction. It's an organized summary and investigation of literally hundreds of studies from many different fields covering the last 20 years. It was a massive undertaking and puts a lot of good stuff in one place.