Nearing Completion of Evaluation of RS system (not)

Will there be any ceremonies associated with the unveiling of Sisyphus's Lament?
I'm going to be in Vegas for the next few days and would love to come by and see the pomp and circumstance in person.
Frank is writing a violin concerto to accompany his book.
So did anyone read the tale of the Fox & the Grapes?
Quote

Originally posted by: arcimedes
Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Arc Singer has made it clear on my forum that if he is ahead playing the conventional strategy there is no need to make a special play.

And doesn't that link for "Progressions" refer to even money bets and not video poker? It says in the first sentence: "even payoffs" and that would apply to games such as roulette and craps with black/red, pass/dont pass, etc.


So, now you think you are the math guru. Your desire to make Singer's CON look reasonable knows no bounds. Here's the 2nd sentence mentioned by snidely.

"This article expands on Wilson's Proof and provides the proof that progression systems cannot overcome a negative expectation even if the game provides uneven payoffs. "

Do you understand what "uneven payoffs" means? This proof is specifically for games like VP.

Good grief.


Arc please don't be a boob. I erred in my original response and made thr correction. I was not challenging the math you quoted but simply asked if it applied to VP. I did mean to challenge your assestment of Rob's system because I know you do not have all the facts about it. And in talking to Rob last night I know that even I don't have all the facts about it.

This brings me back to an earlier statement: there are too many variables to test or even to assess. Nothing will be accomplihed except that Frank will be getting a lot of info about the psychology of gambling.

Singer's system/method/play really combines conventional play with a lucky draw from time to time. His biggest difference is that he knows when to stop playing. There is no magic. He is just smart about leaving when he is ahead at a session.

His special plays got TOO MUCH attention because for the most part he plays conventional strategy. If he is atfault it is foremphasizing the special plays over the conventional strategy.

Singer is the guy you love to hate. But Singer thinks outside the box. In the box is what the casino wants.

You will never be able to justify anything about Rob's play based on any of your accepted math. Rob will not disagree. Nor will I. We have now established in this thread that there is no long term promised land so keep banging your fingers on the keys and your heads against the walls.

Instead you should all be asking this question: if this guy really has a profit of nearly a million dollars how can I do it too?

The answer to that question is what I would like to see.

Quote

Originally posted by: KayPea

Give him a break. Can you imagine how hard it is to be Singer's spokesman and publicist? And how frustrating to be giving away for free what you normally change thousands of dollars to others?


this is where a staff member would come in handy.



Quote

Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
So did anyone read the tale of the Fox & the Grapes?


I would have, but decided to wait for the Cliff Notes.
Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Quote

Originally posted by: arcimedes
Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Arc Singer has made it clear on my forum that if he is ahead playing the conventional strategy there is no need to make a special play.

And doesn't that link for "Progressions" refer to even money bets and not video poker? It says in the first sentence: "even payoffs" and that would apply to games such as roulette and craps with black/red, pass/dont pass, etc.


So, now you think you are the math guru. Your desire to make Singer's CON look reasonable knows no bounds. Here's the 2nd sentence mentioned by snidely.

"This article expands on Wilson's Proof and provides the proof that progression systems cannot overcome a negative expectation even if the game provides uneven payoffs. "

Do you understand what "uneven payoffs" means? This proof is specifically for games like VP.

Good grief.




Instead you should all be asking this question: if this guy really has a profit of nearly a million dollars how can I do it too?

The answer to that question is what I would like to see.


Your neighbor that hit the lottery knows the answer. Seems everyone on LVA but you know the answer.
Quote

Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
So did anyone read the tale of the Fox & the Grapes?


I read it.
Quote

Originally posted by: RoadTrip
Quote

Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
So did anyone read the tale of the Fox & the Grapes?


I would have, but decided to wait for the Cliff Notes.


There will no cliff notes. Please note this tale is related to cognitive dissonance.
Quote

Originally posted by: RoadTrip
Quote

Originally posted by: FrankKneeland
So did anyone read the tale of the Fox & the Grapes?


I would have, but decided to wait for the Cliff Notes.


Fox sees tasty grapes in tree.
Fox jumps but can't reach grapes.
Fox tells himself grapes sour and not tasty, therefore fox leaves happy instead of disappointed.

Sorry Frank, didn't see the no Cliff Notes edict.
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now