Quote
Originally posted by: arcimedesQuote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Frank, I have done several video taped interviews with Rob, includng videos with him explaining his "special plays" and his belief that video poker machines may not be random.
From the interviews, it is easy to see that Singer does not challenge the accepted math of the game, and in fact follows the math of the game. However, is some cases (he says 5% or fewer of the hands played) he will violate what is considered to be "accepted strategy" or what he calls the "optimal hand" to take a long shot.
He is not claiming that 2+2=5.
Then could you please explain why he has explicitly stated no one can win playing by the math yet they can win using his system? That is essentially stating that 98 > 100. Slightly different than 2+2=5 but basically the same.
RESPONSE: How is it, Arc, that you can make this assumption? He has never said to me that no one can win playing by the math. When did he say this? Please give me the source. He told me he doesnt want to play in casinos for hours on end, that he doesnt want to play the grind, that he has a win goal ($2,500) and when he reaches it he leaves.
Instead of believing whatever nonsense he fed you in the interviews, you should read what he has actually stated in the past. Many places to look ... but then that would take some actual work on your part. Somehow I doubt you're up for it.
RESPONSE: I dont care what was said in the past and who quoted it. I asked the questions that I believed to be relevant and important. He answered my questions and I presented his answers. My suggestion to you Arc: create your own website, interview Singer, even video tape the interview, and put it online. I'm sure you have different questions from those I asked.
Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
He does not advocate that players play on machines with lesser paytables, but he makes suggestions for changing traditional strategy when you are on a lesser paytable for certain hands.
Pure BS. Singer has stated many times that a few extra coins for the FH and flush make no difference. I guess he lied to you when he claimed otherwise. What a surprise.
RESPONSE: I agree with you that a few extra coins make a difference. On my last trip to Caesars I estimate that I lost about $500 playing 7/5 bonus instead of 8/5 bonus at Rincon. Singer told me he always preferred the full pay games. ALL of the examples on my video are with FULL PAY games.
Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
There is a side issue -- and that is the personal problems among Singer and others. You are correct Frank, that the personal problems should not get in the way of an objective look at the different kind of betting strategy that Singer sometimes uses.
There is also criticism of his "progressive betting style" but even Singer doesnt use it when he doesnt have to. He frequently uses a "regressive betting style" to conserve and bank the money he's won. There has been too much criticism of his "progressive bets" and his regressive betting style has been totally overlooked by his critics.
Bwah hahahahahahahahaha
Money, you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Please explain his "regressive" betting style.
Are you referring to the standard way progressive systems ALL work where you return (regress) to a previous level when losses are recaptured? Sorry Money, that is not a regressive style. That is how progressive systems work, it is inherent in the system.
You did give me a good laugh, however.
"regressive betting style" ... wow, that's funny.
