Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 28910111213 LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 252

Thread: Challenge to Singer / Argentino

  1. #221
    Originally Posted by Elaine M View Post
    His hope is that the entire 6 months would be in a motel room
    Keystone is back, and we can tell what's on his mind.

    Same as the Nancy-boy, always fantasizing about the same thing.

  2. #222
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    I'm no singer system supporter but it's pretty funny you guys don't want to bet because you think singer will win. You're making his point perfectly. Maybe I'll play ten sessions myself and quit with whatever it is I win. I'm still in for a c note however because I don't believe the system will hold up for ten sessions.
    I have a system called, "Playing 9/6 JoB straight up," and I accept your bet of $100 against me winning eight (or more) out of ten sessions, if you offer it. My stipulations are that the denomination to be played is nickels ($0.05/denom, $0.25/bet) and that each session ends when I am ahead $1.25 (or more) and declare the session over or when I am down, by any amount that I deem appropriate, and declare the session over. I also have to profit overall for the ten sessions to win, but not by any set amount, even $0.25 in profits would make me the winner.

    Are you in Vegas? I should be there later this year. No escrow will be needed, we can each physically display our $100 bill when the time comes. The challenge should not require more than a couple of hours.

  3. #223
    What's your starting bankroll $25? Your bankroll must be your stop limit. I'll take that bet!
    Take off that stupid mask you big baby.

  4. #224
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    What's your starting bankroll $25? Your bankroll must be your stop limit. I'll take that bet!
    Session stop limit or total stop loss? I'm willing to set a session stop loss of $25 (100 units). I'm not willing to set an overall stop loss that low.

    Quite honestly, I think the only way I would let it hit that is if I had already lost a session (which I would have quit before that).

  5. #225
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    What's your starting bankroll $25? Your bankroll must be your stop limit. I'll take that bet!
    Session stop limit or total stop loss? I'm willing to set a session stop loss of $25 (100 units). I'm not willing to set an overall stop loss that low.

    Quite honestly, I think the only way I would let it hit that is if I had already lost a session (which I would have quit before that).
    Each session would have a $25 starting bankroll, a $1.25 win goal and $25 stop loss.
    Take off that stupid mask you big baby.

  6. #226
    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.

  7. #227
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Would someone tell me how many of hours of gambling are required to have the designation of "professional"?

    Why don't you start, mickeycrimm?
    Sure, it's not about the number of hours. It's about whether its your primary source of income.
    "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

  8. #228
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post

    There's no doubt about this.
    Obviously, being a "professional poker player" and being a "professional gambler" are not synonymous, just as being a "professional sports handicapper" and being a "professional gambler" are not synonymous. They are completely different things from an IRS perspective.
    So does this mean that professional poker players who have more income from endorsements and books and lessons and videos lose the right to file a Schedule C as a professional gambler and lose the ability to write off costs associated with, for example, the costs of traveling to tournaments around the country?

    If as you're saying the IRS has such stringent rules about who is a professional gambler what do these guys do when they spend so much?

    I think there's a $10,000 buy-in tournament every week in the USA.
    It's a question I don't know the answer to. They start out as professional gamblers but gain notoriety and make endorsement money. I have no clue what that does to their professional gambler status. I imagine it depends on what their income from each area is.
    "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

  9. #229
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    Each session would have a $25 starting bankroll, a $1.25 win goal and $25 stop loss.
    $100, whenever I'm in Vegas later this year (if you are) it's a bet. I think Four Queens still has 9/6 JoB for nickels, if that works for you.

  10. #230
    Kewlj yes over the long term you can't beat a negative expectation game whether it's 8/5 Bonus or craps or roulette. But there are people who win. These winners didn't beat the game but they won money at the game.

    Rob has not beaten -EV video poker but he has won money at -EV video poker.

    You need to understand the difference. This is really about the difference in wording.

    You're right, Rob would lose it all back if not for his win goals.

  11. #231
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Rob has not beaten -EV video poker but he has won money at -EV video poker.
    Yeah, he hasn't beaten the game....just claims to have won over a million dollars. Idiotic statement Alan.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    You're right, Rob would lose it all back if not for his win goals.
    OMG! Win goals.....just OMG!

  12. #232
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Keystone is back, and we can tell what's on his mind.

    Same as the Nancy-boy, always fantasizing about the same thing.
    'Sup, Petunia? You're still squealing like a little bitch, I see. Now, now, don't get upset. Rob will be over later to pound your ass.
    "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

  13. #233
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    Each session would have a $25 starting bankroll, a $1.25 win goal and $25 stop loss.
    $100, whenever I'm in Vegas later this year (if you are) it's a bet. I think Four Queens still has 9/6 JoB for nickels, if that works for you.
    I don't have to be there. I trust you. Just play out the ten sessions and let me know how you make out. I'm no welsher!
    Take off that stupid mask you big baby.

  14. #234
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    I don't have to be there. I trust you. Just play out the ten sessions and let me know how you make out. I'm no welsher!
    I can actually take a video, I've got a portable phone charger thing, so I can tell you when I start and finish. We could even do FaceTime as long as I can get some WiFi. If I had to use data, it would be eviscerated in minutes.

  15. #235
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Rob has not beaten -EV video poker but he has won money at -EV video poker.
    Yeah, he hasn't beaten the game....just claims to have won over a million dollars. Idiotic statement Alan.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    You're right, Rob would lose it all back if not for his win goals.
    OMG! Win goals.....just OMG!
    You just think that if you play -EV games you must lose. That is just not true. And when you play $25/coin video poker winning about $100,000 a year is realistic and possible.

    There's nothing left to discuss.

  16. #236
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post

    Yeah, he hasn't beaten the game....just claims to have won over a million dollars. Idiotic statement Alan.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    You're right, Rob would lose it all back if not for his win goals.
    OMG! Win goals.....just OMG!
    You just think that if you play -EV games you must lose. That is just not true. And when you play $25/coin video poker winning about $100,000 a year is realistic and possible.

    There's nothing left to discuss.
    Sure at $25 level a $100,000 win for the year is possible. That would be a +1 royal cycle, IF the negative EV of what ever spins necessary to get to +1 royal cycle hadn't eaten too much into that 100k profit. So yeah, we are in agreement...."possible". But when you start talking 10 years in a row of this above expectation, above the mathematic likelihood, then you are getting into "impossible territory". Then you are getting into 18 y.o.'s in a row impossible territory.

    Now the above is IF a player was playing all $25 VP amounts, which Singer isn't. Most of his play is a lower amounts. Much lower amounts. And all of that play would have been losing play or he wouldn't have moved up in level in the first place. Alan, you are doing exactly what Singer does....accounting only for the winning part of his play and pretending there is no losing portion.

    You brought up "realistic". It is very unrealistic to think that you play at x level and lose, then play at xx level and lose, then play at xxx level and lose, then play at xxxx level and magically win there time after time after time. So if you want t talk realistic, Alan.....yeah get realistic for once in your 18 y.o.'s in a row life!

  17. #237
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post

    Yeah, he hasn't beaten the game....just claims to have won over a million dollars. Idiotic statement Alan.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    You're right, Rob would lose it all back if not for his win goals.
    OMG! Win goals.....just OMG!
    You just think that if you play -EV games you must lose. That is just not true. And when you play $25/coin video poker winning about $100,000 a year is realistic and possible.

    There's nothing left to discuss.
    But yet, NONE of you are willing to quit your jobs and try this and make a living off of it. That alone tells is that us that ALL of you DO NOT even believe it works!! If you did, you'd be doing it.

  18. #238
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    But yet, NONE of you are willing to quit your jobs and try this and make a living off of it. That alone tells is that us that ALL of you DO NOT even believe it works!! If you did, you'd be doing it.
    But it is worse that this. It is worse than this 'actions speaks louder than words analogy'.

    Last week I asked Alan, point black, 3 or 4 times if he believed Singer made a million dollars playing -EV video poker. I NEVER even got a yes or no answer from Alan. Time after time I got typical Alan Mendelson double talk. The kind of talk you typically hear from a snake oil salesman (not a shyster....that's a bad word now, according to the new definition).

    So Alan can't even bring himself to say "yes I believe Rob Singer's claims of winning a million dollars playing -EV video poker". But yet, he will support Singer with all this "it's possible bullshit". Alan Mendelson is is a flat out VERY dishonest man.

  19. #239
    Kewlj why don't you call Mission dishonest for saying Rob is likely to win his challenge?

    Yes I believe a $25/coin video poker player could win $100,000 a year. I've also said here that Rob has never proved it nor has he sent me tax returns when Arc sent me his.

    Get off my back you troll.

  20. #240
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Kewlj why don't you call Mission dishonest for saying Rob is likely to win his challenge?
    Because it is NOT the same F***ing challenge Alan! Singer re-wrote the challenge to include session wins....what is it 8 out of 10, which has nothing to do with anything. That is what he and mission are going back and forth about. I don't give a shit about session wins. My challenge was about winning money.

    A progression system should win 8 out of every 10 sessions and STILL LOSE MONEY. So Singer re-wrote the challenge into a wager that he would win. I never challenged that he could win 8 out of 10 sessions. I challenged that he could win money.... longterm. I challenged that he could win a million dollars over 10 years, playing -EV. I didn't challenge that he could win 8 of 10 sessions. I challenged MONEY!


    I suggest you read my -EV video poker thread Alan. Not that it matters as you will either not understand it or pretend to not understand it. And YOU have the F***ing ballz to call ME a troll?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Don't cry for me, Argentino
    By MisterV in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 05-01-2018, 07:49 AM
  2. The Thread Without Argentino
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 04-15-2018, 02:46 PM
  3. Singer Challenge
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 06-11-2013, 08:55 PM
  4. Compare THIS Challenge To The Fedomalley Challenge
    By Rob.Singer in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-29-2011, 11:35 AM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-13-2011, 10:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •