Nothings wrong with any of this stuff. Playing less hands on a -EV game is always a good thing. The wrong is when you claim your system is profitable and one will become a winning player if they use it. If Rob touted his system as an etertaining way to lose less money most of us wouldnt have a problem with it.
AxelWolf wrote " If Rob touted his system as an etertaining way to lose less money most of us wouldnt have a problem with it."
So you actually know what Rob's system is all about? Good for you for studying it.
After all these years I still don't know when Rob moves up in denomination and when he moves down and when he switches from Bonus to a different game.
Right now I'm in the dark and I can't tell you if you'll make a profit or not following Rob's system.
Interesting question Alan. As it is written, I would say no. If you substitute out "casino" and insert "casino personnel or pit personnel", my answer would be yes. But I wouldn't use the term "doesn't care". I would categorize it as "looks the other way". And that can change at any time. It is an ongoing effort to remain within comfort levels or at least where you are 'tolerated'.
"More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ
Been talked about over and over- just like most threads here. First of all, I don't believe anyone here believes in a simulated randomness which basically ensures the hold, payouts, etc., stay within the parameters of a true randomness. See where this is going? Old stuff which only infuriates and causes another 10 pages of name calling, profanity, and "it just can't be" conversations. I should just keep quiet here.
Wait, what now? Are you saying because they are not TRULY random, but only pseudo-random, that the results wouldn't be within the parameters of true randomness? I assume you're talking about the results of a game long term, right (not long term)?
That's just preposterous.
We know that nothing is truly random, because every action or decision is based on another. It isn't that PRNGs aren't "truly random" (they aren't) that's a problem, it's that they are predictable. If you always give it the same input, it will always give you the same output. That doesn't mean the average result from a PRNG or a true RNG are going to be different though, long term.
#FreeTyde
[/QUOTE] Nothings wrong with any of this stuff. Playing less hands on a -EV game is always a good thing. The wrong is when you claim your system is profitable and one will become a winning player if they use it. If Rob touted his system as an etertaining way to lose less money most of us wouldnt have a problem with it.[/QUOTE]
Exactly how is it "wrong" after I've won so much using it....while you have no idea what it is about? The lazy way as I said is for people to simply say it's not a winner because it's played on less than 100% games. I suppose you'd say it IS a winner if played on a 100.17% game right? And that is as ignorant and close-minded as it gets.
Bob Dancer tries using the stupid phrase "playing less hands/slowly/low denominations is fine if you're playing for entertainment on 99.9999% games". But he looks so foolish when he spews such nonsense. I've won more than him--not because I play more than him....hey, he's a poker machine's addict's addict. But because he loses and I don't. Why? He's still playing, working, and paying Shirley like a dog, and he's OLDER than me. I spend $3000-6000/week as I will for the rest of my life, enjoying travel and retirement the way it was meant to be enjoyed. He, like most ap's are stuck in the same old rut that leads to nowhere.
So please wise up axel and try to stop saying dumb things. It would be different if you had good knowledge on what I do but you don't show that you do....even though I believe you'd get it like my ap friend in LV does.
Were this in fact the case, one might wonder why you feel the need the brag about it on a public message board?
In my experience most emotionally well-balanced people with money don't brag about having it.
Think of guys like Sam Walton or Warren Buffet, for example.
No, I suspect you're just a wannabe.
Whatever, macht nichts.
What, Me Worry?
I always have contended that the gamblers who are really making money are quietly sipping pina coladas on the beach or at the pool of their favorite casino of that particular week. They dont give a shit if a handful of anonymous people know about them. They are content to live the good life.
Singer had his 15 minutes of fame, and seems to want to regain that level of respect. But its just not there....and it seems to be tearing him up to the point where he needs to engage meaningless people in his life with insults and bigoted remarks.
so yeah dont piss on my leg with a weak old mans stream of urine and tell me its raining. Things just dont add up to be what he says things are.
reminds me of poorer bred version of john patrick. Another dude that craves the spotlight and the attention but alas has seen it fade away never to return.
patrick has his stanton........singer has his alan.
and thats it........each has the one deluded person that worships the ground he walks on. And patrick/singer is king of the castle,,a castle of 2 people.
just an aside...patrick hasnt posted for a month and a half......his board is having posts go thru..so "the girl" must be taking over in that respect.
However since its not a broken site as it was before....there may be health reasons afoot.....
unless he couldnt pay the electric bill or had to hock his electronics
Rob, it is you that are saying dumb things. Things that just don't add up. And that's what this is about. It isn't personal. But your math just doesn't add up.
I am sure you have seen me post "it isn't that hard or doesn't take that much to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking". That is a 2 part process. When someone makes some claim...."I did this", "I did that", "I won this", "I won that", step 1 is does the math add up. If someone claims to have made such and such playing machines, what are they doing to make their play +EV, where you could be a longterm winner? And similarly if someone makes similar claims, regarding blackjack, or craps, or roulette, what are they doing to turn the game +EV and a longterm winner?
Machine AP's such as mickey, Monet, Axel, RS have explained what they do that makes their play +EV and a longterm winner. The BJ players, such as myself, jbjb, MaxPen (I am including MaxPen with the BJ guys. I think he does more than that, but frankly we need more representation...lol) tell you what we do, card counting, I think jbjb has mentioned hole carding with his team, that makes our play +EV or a longterm winner.
So that is the first hurdle. Does the math add up? Is it mathematically possible. Rob, you simply have failed to clear that first hurdle.
IF the math adds up, the next step or hurdle is to read what the person says. Do they know what they are talking about? Say things founded in mathematical principals? Are they credibile? Quite frankly, you fail here as well, because at this stage all you do is resort to personal attacks against anyone who points out that you have failed the first hurdle. But that doesn't even matter because you have failed that first hurdle. The math doesn't add up.
So it just is not personal. It doesn't matter if someone likes you or dislikes you, or can relate to you. In this case, you simple fail to clear the first hurdle....the math simply doesn't add up.
Can you get this AP friend to post here, and tell us his experiences? (hopefully not from any of your matching IP addresses?). I have requested that before. I would like to see someone else (real) tell us their experiences playing your "system". So far the only supporters I have seen are Alan and Slingshot, two people that both admit they don't play or even know your system. So let's hear from this AP friend.
AP's can back up their claims with math and many other facts. System player's can't and won't ever back anything up with any proof what so ever. That should tell you something.
Alan will want.AP proof. OK, no problem put up enough money and and someone will show proof. Ask Rob and other system players to do the same and it will never happen. You all come up with BS like I don't make personal bets. Alan said that. HOWEVER I bet I can show you where he has said he Will bet.
So far the only forum member who I believe has had a profit is Arcimede$ because I saw his tax returns. Sorry I am unable to believe the rest of you.
You can tell me your beliefs about play but without tax returns leave out your claims of winning.
Yes, Rob too.
So go ahead and explain your strategies but back off on your financial claims... unless you admit to losing like me. LOL
IIRC KJ offered to back up his claims with tax returns and whatnot. He just asked that someone take action for a sizable bet against his claims. Feel free to call his bet.
Speaking of claims, I noticed your son won't back up the claim you made about his 5 Royals in a day and still lost. I bet if you pay him what you owe him he might lie for you. He probably won't since he avoided commenting on it. He didnt want to call his dad a lier and he didnt want directly tell a lie himself. FYI IIRC you made an offer(bluff) for a personal bet regarding that claim. However, you claim you don't make personal bets. Were you lying then, or are you lying now?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)