Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
Too bad for Rob that I already demonstrated that several special plays do not increase chances of winning. They were in this thread.

http://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/showth...-Forums/page11

Of course, that makes it obvious that Rob is lying right now. He even commented in the referenced thread. So, not only does he know his claims are lies, he continues to lie in order to cover it up.
I don't recall Rob Singer ever saying that his special plays increase the chances of winning. In fact, in all of the Special Plays presented on this website, the statistics presented by Rob show that the Special Plays are at a disadvantage to the conventional plays. Rob is very upfront about this.

It seems to me that the point that Rob is making is this: it's not that his Special Plays have a better chance of winning. It's just that when they do "click" or hit he will win more than what the "optimal hold" will win. Rob said his "system" is based on going for the big wins which are mostly quads and quad aces when the chance of getting those present themselves. And he says he deviates from the accepted "math plays" just 5% of the time.

And what we haven't determined yet from Rob is when he will elect to make those Special Plays-- and when that "5% of the time" is that he does not follow the "math of the game"?

Arcimedes, it seems to me that Rob's system is not a threat or even a challenge to the accepted math of the game. It seems to me that Rob's entire "system" is just a way to show which kinds of dealt hands a player might choose to work with to take a long shot. And when you take those long shots you might get lucky and you might not.

It's actually the same playing conventional strategy by the "math". It doesn't really matter if I play the correct strategy or not because the random number generator might not cooperate when I make the "math play". For example, I could be dealt a flush with four to the royal 200 times and never get the royal card. (Didn't that happen to you, Arc?) You see, conventional strategy is also subject to a RNG just as Singer's strategy is.

You need luck with the Singer strategy just as you need luck with the conventional strategy. I guess if you wanted to eliminate the "luck factor" then the next time you are dealt a flush with four to the royal you should just hold the dealt flush. That will eliminate the "luck factor" wouldn't it?

We're all still waiting for Frank's report. I hope it is posted soon so we have something new to discuss.