Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
mrmarcus: I have never criticized Dancer for not explaining that VP is high variance. I have never praised Singer for advocating a system that actually increases that variance. So, to refresh your memory, the answer to your question about which I have done more-- the answer is neither.
Money's posts are REPLETE with examples. Here's one from this very thread, for those of us who are particularly reality challenged:
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
mrmarcus: I have never criticized Dancer for not explaining that VP is high variance. I have never praised Singer for advocating a system that actually increases that variance. So, to refresh your memory, the answer to your question about which I have done more-- the answer is neither.
Quote
Originally posted by: tomdoug It amazes me how some posters are quick to "put words in your mouth", but when asked to produce a quote to back up their accusations, they never do.
Money's posts are REPLETE with examples. Here's one from this very thread, for those of us who are particularly reality challenged:
Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Singer is not a charlatan... he admits that his "plays" are NOT the optimum plays but are his option to try to win a bigger amount of money? Is that what a charlatan does-- admit to his differences and be upfront and honest that another (more acceptable) strategy does have better odds of winning the grind?
Singer is simply saying, what I believe, are three things:
...
3. be ready to gamble when you gamble. instead of playing the grind take your shot at the big win
is that what a charlatan says?
And, again, to be clear, THAT'S WHAT THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE CASINOS SAY!!! They want you to trade your thousand small $1 losses for a single $850 win. That's their business! Their game!
