What is ironic here, is that even Rob concedes that his special plays do not have a mathematical advantage. In fact, he has publicly stated that they are at a mathematical disadvantage to conventional play. Rob attributes his success to a combination of factors that includes "luck."Originally Posted by redietz
I don't know how luck can be quantified or explained. But I think he does owe us some other explanations to clear up the questions that popped up after we all read his SPS statement. I'm willing to wait and see what he has to say. But honestly, the guy is not under any pressure to post: he's not facing any book publication deadline, magazine or newspaper deadline.
In short, the "math" will never support him. The real question is how does he use "non math principles" (and I just pulled that phrase out of thin air) to explain how he won nearly a million dollars over ten years.
I've said this many times before: if Rob had simply said that he got lucky and beat the casinos for a million bucks and wrote about his exploits he would be a hero. But by calling it a system or method or program or whatever, he put a label on what he did which has opened him up to all sorts of challenges.
Reply With Quote
