Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
Is this a challenge of Rob's system or a challenge of your beliefs? If you want a challenge of Rob's system then have Rob spell out what he will accomplish and bet on Rob succeeding or failing.
It's not about my beliefs Alan, it is about proven mathematics.

I don't give a rats ass about Rob's system, or session wins or any of that. My contention for a year now, since I have been on this site is that Rob Singer did not win a million+ dollars playing a negative EV game. Rob claims to have averaged 100k for more than 10 years. That is what I want to bet. To do that we are going to need at least 6 months sample size. According to Rob's numbers he should win 50 thousand dollars in 6 months time. That is my bet because THAT is what I have been arguing since I came to this forum.


Now, I don't know what this obsession that Singer, Alan, and now regnis have with sessions and 8 out of 10 session wins? I personally have never said anything about that. A progression betting system if done correctly probably will have 80% winning sessions, maybe 90%, depending on how the progression is set up. BUT it will still lose money overall! Those few losses will be much larger than the wins and wipe out all those small wins....and then some.

So who gives a rats ass if he has 80% session wins if at the end of that time he is down ten's of thousands of dollars? To use Rob's own analogy, is he going to go to the grocery store and say, well I don't have any money because I lost 30 thousand dollars playing my progression system, but I did win 80% of my sessions?

You guys twisting this wager around to some number of session wins is true to form, dishonest and manipulative. I would say it is a "shyster" move but apparently monet has assigned some kind of anti-Semitic definition to "shyster" that I fail to see in any dictionary. So I will just say it is a lie, because no one cares about number of session wins. What I and others challenge is that Rob Singer did not win 100k for 10+ years and that is what any bet should be, not some made up number of session wins.

Sessions wins is like a football team that has just lost a game, saying "yeah but we had more first downs that the other team". That simply is not what matters, and neither is session wins. You can't pay your rent with session wins....not that this would be an issue for Rob Singer, as history shows he isn't big on paying rent and prefers to just get evicted.