$25k challenge

[Alan Mendelson]

This is interesting. MaxPen has now added "rundown" to the report. Arcimedes who made the disclosure never mentioned "rundown" and in the several years that this was on the forum in various discussions "rundown" was never mentioned. But now MaxPen informs us that it was a "rundown" apartment complex. How fascinating it is that MaxPen has added this to the story! And so it goes...

[MaxPen]

This is interesting. MaxPen has now added "rundown" to the report. Arcimedes who made the disclosure never mentioned "rundown" and in the several years that this was on the forum in various discussions "rundown" was never mentioned. But now MaxPen informs us that it was a "rundown" apartment complex. How fascinating it is that MaxPen has added this to the story! And so it goes...

I simply Google'd the outfits with judgements against PoorBoy Robbie. Definitely not the places to find resident millionaires. More like residences of has beens and deadbeat dads.

[RS__]

This is interesting. MaxPen has now added "rundown" to the report. Arcimedes who made the disclosure never mentioned "rundown" and in the several years that this was on the forum in various discussions "rundown" was never mentioned. But now MaxPen informs us that it was a "rundown" apartment complex. How fascinating it is that MaxPen has added this to the story! And so it goes...

I simply Google'd the outfits with judgements against PoorBoy Robbie. Definitely not the places to find resident millionaires. More like residences of has beens and deadbeat dads.

I thought we were talking about Rob, not Alan?


Oh wait, nevermind -- they're like two peas in a pod. They have more similarities than I previously thought.

[Rob.Singer]

Isn't it amazing how all the ap's are so sure of themselves when lying about my strategy and my results, but when they have the chance to back up their flawed claims they find themselves in the same embarrassing sinking boat that hot-shot/all balls "AP" Fezzik and the feckless HP crowd found themselves in when actual rubber hits the road. Yeah guys--talk a big game from the anonymous safety of your comfy armchairs--but when it's time to put up or shut up you all fold like the cheap lawn chair Fezzik was. Chickenshits, thru and thru.

In the meantime, keep trying to convince everybody that two-table counting is "great and undetectable" since partial counts will make you a winner in the same manner a more accurate count will. Here's a flash: "Wonging" (such a stupid term) is nothing but more BJ BS created by Wong for marketing purposes. When will you idiots learn....he SELLS gaming and loses at actual gambling. That's why he sells. He's no different than beggars like redietz do with his "pick service". If the strategy works then there's no need to need other people's money. And here's another flash: try partial counting, aka inaccurate counting--at the table you're actually placing bets at. What geniuses.

Oh max is still frustrated with me and can't handle that I once again made his ap fools feel inadequate. That "rundown" apt.? House was sold, RV was ordered and arrived a few months early. Only way to go was to break the lease. And you're so dumb you think judgements mean anything to retirees who pay for their houses with cash anyways. You're the Rachel Maddow of this forum. She spent a year claiming Trump was broke and didn't pay taxes....until she got a copy of his return and ended up looking like the moron she is. Your turn. Find my retirement account, and my wife's BTW, post them, then look like just another anonymous idiot. It won't take much effort.

Nothing but a bunch of frustrated cowards. Must I publish this challenge in a couple of LV newspapers too?

[Dankyone]

Rob, in your opinion is there any other successful gambler on Earth other than yourself?

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, in your opinion is there any other successful gambler on Earth other than yourself?

Of course there are. There are perhaps thousands of them. But a better question is what goes into being a successful gambler? Suppose you start that discussion Dankyone. I'm certainly not qualified. LOL

[redietz]

Isn't it amazing how all the ap's are so sure of themselves when lying about my strategy and my results, but when they have the chance to back up their flawed claims they find themselves in the same embarrassing sinking boat that hot-shot/all balls "AP" Fezzik and the feckless HP crowd found themselves in when actual rubber hits the road. Yeah guys--talk a big game from the anonymous safety of your comfy armchairs--but when it's time to put up or shut up you all fold like the cheap lawn chair Fezzik was. Chickenshits, thru and thru.

In the meantime, keep trying to convince everybody that two-table counting is "great and undetectable" since partial counts will make you a winner in the same manner a more accurate count will. Here's a flash: "Wonging" (such a stupid term) is nothing but more BJ BS created by Wong for marketing purposes. When will you idiots learn....he SELLS gaming and loses at actual gambling. That's why he sells. He's no different than beggars like redietz do with his "pick service". If the strategy works then there's no need to need other people's money. And here's another flash: try partial counting, aka inaccurate counting--at the table you're actually placing bets at. What geniuses.

Oh max is still frustrated with me and can't handle that I once again made his ap fools feel inadequate. That "rundown" apt.? House was sold, RV was ordered and arrived a few months early. Only way to go was to break the lease. And you're so dumb you think judgements mean anything to retirees who pay for their houses with cash anyways. You're the Rachel Maddow of this forum. She spent a year claiming Trump was broke and didn't pay taxes....until she got a copy of his return and ended up looking like the moron she is. Your turn. Find my retirement account, and my wife's BTW, post them, then look like just another anonymous idiot. It won't take much effort.

Nothing but a bunch of frustrated cowards. Must I publish this challenge in a couple of LV newspapers too?

LOL -- let's try this. if Argentino/Singer can locate anyone who paid me, Robert Dietz, for a "pick service" last year, I will donate $500 to him, $500 to Mr. Mendelson, and $500 to slingshot as seed money for their video poker play. Oh yeah, let's pledge 1K to coach belly. I include coach belly at a better payscale because at least he'll motivate the other three to try to find somebody.

Now let's see Argentino/Singer hem and haw and sidestep this one.

[coach belly]

if Argentino/Singer can locate anyone who paid me, Robert Dietz, for a "pick service" last year, I will donate $500 to him, $500 to Mr. Mendelson, and $500 to slingshot as seed money for their video poker play. Oh yeah, let's pledge 1K to coach belly. I include coach belly at a better payscale because at least he'll motivate the other three to try to find somebody.

Put the $1K into escrow and I will begin my motivational processes.

First I'll tack a pillow onto the wall, to mitigate the impact to my forehead.

[coach belly]

Nothing but a bunch of frustrated cowards. Chickenshits, thru and thru.

After insisting all this time that it is mathematically impossible to win with your strategy,
they must be unnerved by the top math guy's revelation that you may actually be a
slight favorite to win 8 of 10 sessions, and be ahead overall after 10 sessions.

Perhaps they find comfort by clinging to the notion that you
will ultimately lose "in the long run".

Why not present an opportunity to approach the log run?

Include an automatic rematch option, that only the loser can exercise,
if they are willing to pony up another $25K.

After all, even if you win the first 10 session "set", you have accumulated -EV,
and that means you are due to lose a subsequent set...
just not sure exactly when that will happen.

[Mission146]

After insisting all this time that it is mathematically impossible to win with your strategy,
they must be unnerved by the top math guy's revelation that you may actually be a
slight favorite to win 8 of 10 sessions, and be ahead overall after 10 sessions.

Perhaps they find comfort by clinging to the notion that you
will ultimately lose "in the long run".

Why not present an opportunity to approach the log run?

Include an automatic rematch option, that only the loser can exercise,
if they are willing to pony up another $25K.

After all, even if you win the first 10 session "set", you have accumulated -EV,
and that means you are due to lose a subsequent set...
just not sure exactly when that will happen.

1.) I don't expect anyone familiar with math to want to make a bet with a negative expected value. It surprises me that not wanting to make such a bet should qualify someone as, "A coward."

2.) I seriously doubt that I am the, "Top math guy," here and I certainly am not on WoV.

3.) Do you know how many hands Singer would have to play to get to the point where he, "Mathematically must lose?" A fucking lot. Millions and millions if he is playing high enough returning games. So, I obviously don't know that Singer will play enough hands in his life such that he must lose, based on the length/number of sessions he claims to have played, I say likely not.

4.) Why do I care if Singer loses or not? I'm not Singer. I care about whether or not gambling advice being given is mathematically sound, which I define as, "Having a positive expected value."

5.) It is highly doubtful that enough sessions even could be played to get into the, "Long run," when it comes to something like this.

You have to get into millions and millions of hands before someone is virtually guaranteed to lose, and that's if you're just playing one denomination. That's why I personally don't challenge Singer's claimed results, from what I can tell, they are mathematically possible.

I guess I could choose whether or not to believe Singer's claims, but to be honest, I don't give enough of a fuck about him to have a preference as to what I believe.

[slingshot]

if Argentino/Singer can locate anyone who paid me, Robert Dietz, for a "pick service" last year, I will donate $500 to him, $500 to Mr. Mendelson, and $500 to slingshot as seed money for their video poker play. Oh yeah, let's pledge 1K to coach belly. I include coach belly at a better payscale because at least he'll motivate the other three to try to find somebody.

Put the $1K into escrow and I will begin my motivational processes.

First I'll tack a pillow onto the wall, to mitigate the impact to my forehead.

You're too kind, Red. I always wanted to play one session of 5¢-$1 artt. If you do, I'll just keep my winnings and return your money as thanks.

[coach belly]

I seriously doubt that I am the, "Top math guy," here and I certainly am not on WoV.

I can't think of anybody here who would rank above you as the "top math guy",
but feel free to nominate others if you are so inclined....WOV is undoubtedly as you say it is.

Do you know how many hands Singer would have to play to get to the point where he, "Mathematically must lose?" A fucking lot. Millions and millions if he is playing high enough returning games. So, I obviously don't know that Singer will play enough hands in his life such that he must lose, based on the length/number of sessions he claims to have played, I say likely not.

I understand the above to be Singer's contention all along.

It is highly doubtful that enough sessions even could be played to get into the, "Long run," when it comes to something like this.

You have to get into millions and millions of hands before someone is virtually guaranteed to lose, and that's if you're just playing one denomination. That's why I personally don't challenge Singer's claimed results, from what I can tell, they are mathematically possible.

Your explanation seems reasonable.

Singer has always claimed that the long term doesn't necessarily apply to the player,
the player can't play enough to reach or even approach the long term.

The long term is theoretical, and applies to the casino.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob, in your opinion is there any other successful gambler on Earth other than yourself?

Yes, of course. And some of them are AP's. My strategy is based on disciplined structure, mostly optimal play throughout all denominations, and relying on good luck to appear in the form of one lucky big hit within a session, or a series of soft profit cashouts that serve to attain the minimum win goal.

As far as AP's....some of them are lifetime winners, but it isn't because of some grind-it-out "with an edge" play. It's because they get lucky, and it's no more or no less than that.

[Dankyone]

Rob, in your opinion is there any other successful gambler on Earth other than yourself?

Yes, of course. And some of them are AP's. My strategy is based on disciplined structure, mostly optimal play throughout all denominations, and relying on good luck to appear in the form of one lucky big hit within a session, or a series of soft profit cashouts that serve to attain the minimum win goal.

As far as AP's....some of them are lifetime winners, but it isn't because of some grind-it-out "with an edge" play. It's because they get lucky, and it's no more or no less than that.

Well, that’s something. Thanks.

[Dankyone]

Rob, in your opinion is there any other successful gambler on Earth other than yourself?

Of course there are. There are perhaps thousands of them. But a better question is what goes into being a successful gambler? Suppose you start that discussion Dankyone. I'm certainly not qualified. LOL

There have been thousands of discussions on that topic in this very board. As you say, you are not qualified, and you derail every single one of them. There is no point in starting another one, knowing that:

You will say you never heard of it.

You will demand an explanation.

It will be given.

You will say you still don’t understand.

It will be explained in detail by someone who knows a lot more than you about whatever subject it is..

You will say that’s BS!

Then Rob will chime in, insulting those who tried to explain something to you.

Rinse and Repeat.

Again, there is no point in me starting another thread like this.

[MisterV]

That "rundown" apt.? House was sold, RV was ordered and arrived a few months early. Only way to go was to break the lease.

Bullshit.

Honorable people, people with class and money, do not break leases.

They're upfront with the landlord, explain what is going on, and work out a compromise.

Yeah, they have to pay: so what?

That's what money is for ... if you have it, that is.

Without exception, people who fuck up in life enough to get sued and lose are ipso facto LOSERS.

Class tells, and its absence simply screams out loud.

[Mission146]

As far as AP's....some of them are lifetime winners, but it isn't because of some grind-it-out "with an edge" play. It's because they get lucky, and it's no more or no less than that.

No, that's complete bullshit.

Let's say you have a scenario in which you have a casino that will give you a total of $1,500 free play over a few months and all you have to do is play $5,000 coin-in on the first day of having a Player's Club card. Playing a Video Poker game on a low enough denomination, you essentially can't lose if you have even a minimal idea of how to play it correctly. The only potential problem is if the card ends up screwed for some reason, but aside from that, there's just virtually no way to lose money overall on an individual card.

There are other examples I could come up with. On other plays, it's just because the AP hits what one would consider the, "Long Run," (which I consider the point that at least 999,999/1,000,000 players would win) much more quickly due to the size of the advantage. It's the same thing with recreational players, the bigger the house edge against them (absent huge variance-related factors or huge top prizes) the faster you reach the point that no player over a given sample could conceivably win.

Being ahead on an individual type of play (or overall) may come down to Variance if the AP is not playing with a big enough edge or is overplaying bankroll (too much variance). However, there are many examples of plays in which an AP could not lose given even a fairly small sample of attempts.

Hell, there are literally individual plays such that an AP can't possibly lose. Those are rare, of course, and I don't think an AP would make much doing those exclusively. I'm talking about slot vulturing conditions such that it is impossible to lose the spin(s) on this last part.

[Alan Mendelson]

That "rundown" apt.? House was sold, RV was ordered and arrived a few months early. Only way to go was to break the lease.

Bullshit.

Honorable people, people with class and money, do not break leases.

They're upfront with the landlord, explain what is going on, and work out a compromise.

Yeah, they have to pay: so what?

That's what money is for ... if you have it, that is.

Without exception, people who fuck up in life enough to get sued and lose are ipso facto LOSERS.

Class tells, and its absence simply screams out loud.

I don't know what Rob's situation was. But I can tell you that there are some corporate landlords that are totally unreasonable. I rented from one in LA that demanded three months rent to break a lease early, yet they only required a one month deposit. What would you have done if you had to break your lease? Would you have paid three months rent or just forfeited your deposit?

I've also rented from corps that stated in their leases that there was a mandatory cleaning charge at move out equal to fifty percent of the deposit plus a mandatory painting fee. Bye bye deposit even if you never hung a picture or used the oven.

Negotiate with these corps? LOL

[Rob.Singer]

That "rundown" apt.? House was sold, RV was ordered and arrived a few months early. Only way to go was to break the lease.

Bullshit.

Honorable people, people with class and money, do not break leases.

They're upfront with the landlord, explain what is going on, and work out a compromise.

Yeah, they have to pay: so what?

That's what money is for ... if you have it, that is.

Without exception, people who fuck up in life enough to get sued and lose are ipso facto LOSERS.

Class tells, and its absence simply screams out loud.

Typical unqualified response.

We held that apt. for four years plus, which was used for our son's family and friends' visits while he was serving overseas in the army. We never lived in it until 2011 when we sold our home and had to move out before the RV was delivered. When I tried to work out a deal for the final two months with the property mgr. they treated me like some amateur yuppie. So I told them to stick it. They sued me and I never even knew about it until arci posted it here out of the usual Singer-frustration. After discovering this I told the lawyer and his judgement to stick it again because they can't get a thing from retirees, and we have no need for credit.

They lost/I won. Next time I'm sure they'll do their homework before acting like a-holes.

[mickeycrimm]

Nothing but a bunch of frustrated cowards. Chickenshits, thru and thru.

After insisting all this time that it is mathematically impossible to win with your strategy,
they must be unnerved by the top math guy's revelation that you may actually be a
slight favorite to win 8 of 10 sessions, and be ahead overall after 10 sessions.

Perhaps they find comfort by clinging to the notion that you
will ultimately lose "in the long run".

Why not present an opportunity to approach the log run?

Include an automatic rematch option, that only the loser can exercise,
if they are willing to pony up another $25K.

After all, even if you win the first 10 session "set", you have accumulated -EV,
and that means you are due to lose a subsequent set...
just not sure exactly when that will happen.

Coach, you are always looking for a bet that you want to be on the wrong side of. Why don't you challenge Rob?