It was two years ago today...

[Rob.Singer]

Rob, refresh my memory on the massive wager. Was it that you put 600K in escrow and would win it how? I'm trying to be impressed, but I need to know the difference between what you did and an anonymous Powerball winner making a bet for 600K and saying he could prove he won it via Powerball. Or maybe somebody winning 100K the year the Greatest Show on Turf won the Super Bowl while opening the year at 300-1 odds. That kind of win is impressive, but without context (how many teams did he really take?), the meaning gets diminished.

It was a simple bet that I could prove I won $640k in profit to date from using my play strategy after Fezzik and other loudmouths on the Larry Grossman show when interviewing me in the studio, said basically the same things you and other "AP's" lie about here and on WoV: that it's impossible I did what I said I did. So I came back at them with this huge challenge, I put the escrow up, the details were published in two papers, and they ran away from accepting the bet.

Be glad you were not a part of it. The embarrassment did not subside very easily.

LOL -- Rob, I'd never take a bet like that. Not in a million years. Good Lord. Plus if you check, you'll see I've always said I thought you won what you did when you claimed you did. What I disavow is the idea that it works going forward.

Why wouldn't I take a bet like that? It's the old line from Guys and Dolls. Sky Masterson explains that if someone shows you a fresh deck of cards still wrapped in cellophane and wants to bet you that the Jack of Spades will leap out of the deck and spit cider in your ear, do not bet him, my son. Because as surely as night follows day, you'll wind up with an earful of cider.

Words to live by.

Empty words red.

After winning $640k in about 7 years of playing my strategy, is it any wonder why these people didn't then propose a bet on my strategy going forward? In fact, I did offer that to them as a 10-session witnessed event w/o betting during my interview, but once they realized how much time it might take along with my overnight-only playing schedule at locations all over Nevada, they chose to continue to insult me rather than face the true result of their claims.

It (my consistent winning) was never about some odd occurrence that happen to fall on the other side of the Bell curve. It was always about a play strategy that would have at least an 85% probability of being successful for anyone who tries it. And the fact that it does not rely on slot club fluff, greater-than 100% pay tables, or any other marketing offerings solidify it as a bona fide profit-maker from the vp machines.

[Rob.Singer]

Shapiro was a knowledgeable player but I never considered him to be an AP. He was a paid team player and never played on his own money.

Rob anyone can brag after the fact. It's like bragging after you got outhouse lucky and hit the lottery. Do your bragging before you make the big hit, not after.

First, I met with and played VP with Shapiro at the Suncoast 6 months before my hit. We explained to one another everything about how and what we played; we obviously were complete opposites and he WAS an AP.. He never mentioned playing on one of those stupid teams, and he was playing with his own money while with me. I also met his wife (Joanie I believe) who also played with HER own money.

The fact that I wrote about my $25 royal was not "after-the-fact bragging". It was a simple report--something I did on an almost weekly basis, win or lose. If there were any ongoing bragging, it was about how I had created a consistently winning vp strategy that really didn't rely on playing the highest pay tables.

I followed the weekly reports. I could hardly believe the stopping of all articles because of a single incident of chasing three A's- a trap I've fallen into several trips. It was kinda sad, as I enjoyed the weekly articles. Everyone focused on the winnings- hardly anyone noticed the losses that sometimes occurred. Even more overlooked were the very short sessions where the win goal was reached within a few minutes.

Sling....the critics will always claim "if he played negative EV games he will lose, and if he played positive EV games he will win" because they know no other way to handle it. They do acknowledge that it's possible to come out ahead on a 99.9%. game....but so very weirdly, these same people cannot fathom it happening over and over again. In fact, play a 100.1% game and all of a sudden they're on board. It boggles the mind how just .2% changes their entire outlook. It only goes to show how little experience they have with actual gambling, and how much experience they have with the theory of it all. "Pity" is not a strong enuf word here.

[redietz]

It was a simple bet that I could prove I won $640k in profit to date from using my play strategy after Fezzik and other loudmouths on the Larry Grossman show when interviewing me in the studio, said basically the same things you and other "AP's" lie about here and on WoV: that it's impossible I did what I said I did. So I came back at them with this huge challenge, I put the escrow up, the details were published in two papers, and they ran away from accepting the bet.

Be glad you were not a part of it. The embarrassment did not subside very easily.

LOL -- Rob, I'd never take a bet like that. Not in a million years. Good Lord. Plus if you check, you'll see I've always said I thought you won what you did when you claimed you did. What I disavow is the idea that it works going forward.

Why wouldn't I take a bet like that? It's the old line from Guys and Dolls. Sky Masterson explains that if someone shows you a fresh deck of cards still wrapped in cellophane and wants to bet you that the Jack of Spades will leap out of the deck and spit cider in your ear, do not bet him, my son. Because as surely as night follows day, you'll wind up with an earful of cider.

Words to live by.

Empty words red.

After winning $640k in about 7 years of playing my strategy, is it any wonder why these people didn't then propose a bet on my strategy going forward? In fact, I did offer that to them as a 10-session witnessed event w/o betting during my interview, but once they realized how much time it might take along with my overnight-only playing schedule at locations all over Nevada, they chose to continue to insult me rather than face the true result of their claims.

It (my consistent winning) was never about some odd occurrence that happen to fall on the other side of the Bell curve. It was always about a play strategy that would have at least an 85% probability of being successful for anyone who tries it. And the fact that it does not rely on slot club fluff, greater-than 100% pay tables, or any other marketing offerings solidify it as a bona fide profit-maker from the vp machines.

Rob, I believe arci and others have done independent calculations of your martingale-type strategy and the "probability of being successful" is indeed 80-85% FOR ANY GIVEN SESSION. That's the way it's supposed to work. No surprises there.

[Alan Mendelson]

If you are going to throw two dice simultaneously, there are 11 combinations of those two dice showing at least one 2 and there is one combination that will show 2-2. But when you throw two dice simultaneously and after the throw is completed an observer says that at least one of the two dice has landed on two there is a 1/6 chance that both dice are showing 2s.

Alan, there are 36 combinations on the dice. It is established that 11 of those combinations include at least one 2. The frequency of rolling 2-2 in 1 in 36. Discounting out that roll there are 10 combinations that have exactly one 2. 36/10 means you will make a roll that has exactly one 2 every 3.6 rolls. So per 36 rolls you will have 10 rolls with exactly one 2, and only 1 roll with 2-2. And it doesn't matter that after the rolls you have information that at least one die is a two.

This is what you will be bucking if you get in a gambling game with it.

there is no reason for a "gambling game" because the question is very simple:

If one die is a 2, what are the odds that both dice will show a 2? Well, if one die is already a 2, the second die has a 1/6 chance of also showing a 2.

You don't need a gambling game to resolve that. You just need to look at two physical dice.

All of these "side bets" do not have anything to do with the wording of the actual question. But you probably think they do, because after all, this is a reading comprehension and English language issue.

[coach belly]

If one die is a 2, what are the odds that both dice will show a 2? Well, if one die is already a 2, the second die has a 1/6 chance of also showing a 2.

You don't need a gambling game to resolve that. You just need to look at two physical dice.

All of these "side bets" do not have anything to do with the wording of the actual question. But you probably think they do, because after all, this is a reading comprehension and English language issue.

I'm not sure I agree with the 1/6 crowd, but I'm willing to take my chances in the short term...that I can roll 2-2 before I roll 2-x seven times.

This is the crux of jbjb's bet, which he challenged Alan to accept. What is the "house" edge on this bet?

8:1 bet for $100 per roll. Win $800 when 2-2 shows and lose $100 when 2-1, 2-3, 2-4, 2-5 or 2-6 shows

I've accepted this bet on Alan's behalf...on behalf of the 1/6 crowd, on behalf of the short-term win crowd, the quit-while-ahead crowd, the loss-limits crowd.

So far not a single "AP" has stepped up to take my action.

I'm on my way to LV tomorrow night...I'm ready to face any of you first thing Wednesday morning, and for a week after that.

Speak up now, or forever be branded as less than crickets.

[jbjb]

Minimum 500 dice rolls.

[jbjb]

Coach, just do what I suggested a few days ago. Roll the dice yourself for a period of time. Mark column A when the 2-x(where x is not a 2) then mark column B when 2-2 shows.

I believe we all agree it's the wording of the puzzle that's the debate here, not the actual math.

[coach belly]

Coach, just do what I suggested a few days ago. Roll the dice yourself for a period of time. Mark column A when the 2-x(where x is not a 2) then mark column B when 2-2 shows.

I believe we all agree it's the wording of the puzzle that's the debate here, not the actual math.

I don't need to do that...I accept the results of the Wizard's one billion hand simulation.

I'm still willing to try to beat you in the short term. 500 rolls sounds reasonable.

We need to figure out how much money to put in escrow. What's your edge?

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, I believe arci and others have done independent calculations of your martingale-type strategy and the "probability of being successful" is indeed 80-85% FOR ANY GIVEN SESSION. That's the way it's supposed to work. No surprises there.

Well hot damn. 80% win rate is good enough for me.

[Alan Mendelson]

Coach you will lose this bet with jbjb, and this bet that jbjb proposed is NOT the same as the question with two dice and one showing a 2.

Let me go over jbjb's bet again for you.

Your chance of seeing 2-2 on any roll is 1/36.
Even when the dice are rolled and one 2 shows up, there is a 1/11 chance of another 2 showing up.

The difference with the two-dice question is that we know in advance that at least one die shows a two, and with that the odds of both dice showing two are reduced to 1/6.

But in jbjb's bet you don't know that at least one 2 will be rolled.

If jbjb would let you roll one die and if it comes up a 2 for a win, and if he's willing to pay you 7 to 6 for a 1 out of 6 possibility, take it.

[jbjb]

What's your edge?

Quote MustangSally from page 41 of that thread on WoV:

"paying 9 for 1(same as 8 to 1) i gets a player probability of a net loss over 360 dice rolls to be abouts 76.9%

a sure bet contest for sure."

[coach belly]

Coach you will lose this bet with jbjb

That's OK...thanks for your concern, but I still plan to win.

Can we count on you to witness and record this event to be posted afterwards?

[jbjb]

Coach you will lose this bet with jbjb, and this bet that jbjb proposed is NOT the same as the question with two dice and one showing a 2.

Let me go over jbjb's bet again for you.

Your chance of seeing 2-2 on any roll is 1/36.
Even when the dice are rolled and one 2 shows up, there is a 1/11 chance of another 2 showing up.

The difference with the two-dice question is that we know in advance that at least one die shows a two, and with that the odds of both dice showing two are reduced to 1/6.

But in jbjb's bet you don't know that at least one 2 will be rolled.

If jbjb would let you roll one die and if it comes up a 2 for a win, and if he's willing to pay you 7 to 6 for a 1 out of 6 possibility, take it.

Now that would be stupid of me. Rolling just one die, 5 to 1 is even odds (no edge either way).

As I said early, you get the gist of the puzzle. It's that we all disagree on the English of it.

[coach belly]

What's your edge?

Quote MustangSally from page 41 of that thread on WoV:

"paying 9 for 1(same as 8 to 1) i gets a player probability of a net loss over 360 dice rolls to be abouts 76.9%

a sure bet contest for sure."

How much money should I expect to lose after 500 rolls?

[jbjb]

Coach you will lose this bet with jbjb

That's OK...thanks for your concern, but I still plan to win.

Can we count on you to witness and record this event to be posted afterwards?

Coach has loaded dice!!

[jbjb]

What's your edge?

Quote MustangSally from page 41 of that thread on WoV:

"paying 9 for 1(same as 8 to 1) i gets a player probability of a net loss over 360 dice rolls to be abouts 76.9%

a sure bet contest for sure."

How much money should I expect to lose?

Your expected loss is $2777.7778.

[coach belly]

Coach has loaded dice!!

No...this will be on the up-and-up.

We can buy the dice in the gift shop, with Alan filming.

[coach belly]

Quote MustangSally from page 41 of that thread on WoV:

"paying 9 for 1(same as 8 to 1) i gets a player probability of a net loss over 360 dice rolls to be abouts 76.9%

a sure bet contest for sure."

How much money should I expect to lose?

Your expected loss is $2777.7778.

I'll put $3K in escrow if you are willing to do the same.

[jbjb]

Coach has loaded dice!!

No...this will be on the up-and-up.

We can buy the dice in the gift shop, with Alan filming.

I was joking about loaded dice. When I'm available, I'll let you know. You don't even have to be there and Alan can still film.

[coach belly]

When I'm available, I'll let you know. You don't even have to be there and Alan can still film.

What does that mean? I don't have to be there? I plan to be there tomorrow.

You are virtually assured an easy $3k profit and you are saying that you are not available?

Are you in prison or involuntarily committed to a mental hospital?