Rob Singer accepts the challenge.

ARC

Please elaborate on how you can win only 10 sessions out of 27 tries and still be ahead. Do you have a stop loss on on a given session. For example, the most you will lose per session is $ 1,000. You obviously I have a good money management system. Would you mind sharing?

Thanks

The Gambler

Arc, you wrote a lot here so let's see what I can respond to in a simple, clear way:

First my mistake about the payoff on quad aces because I play $5/coin and the payoff is $2000 for me when quads are hit. You are correct, the payoff is actually 400 coins.

I dont disagree that when you hold the full house you will get more hands. But how many times do you get a shot at quad aces? You know what Arc -- I think there are a lot of players who would like to take the shot at quad aces. Just about a week ago I broke up a full house and got lucky and hit the fourth ace and getting that handpay of $2000 felt a lot better than settling for a full house -- even at the $5 level which was $200. In fact, when we raised this before other board members also said they would hold just the aces. I guess they are stupid idiots too, right Arc??

And about mentioning "single hands" ?? Well my friend, all video poker is played one hand at a time. What surprises me is that YOU did not commend me for playing the correct strategy?? Frankly, I wonder if I had just held the three 3s and gave myself an extra chance at picking up the quads and a $2,000 win.

By the way, later I was dealt 66222 and held only the trip 2s. On the draw I got another six and the case 2 for the $2,000 on that hand.

You are a true believer in playing your perfect stategy and there is nothing wrong with that until you believe that everyone else who doesnt follow "perfect strategy" is wrong. What you fail to recognize is that others have a different utility for each hand they play and how they manage their money when they play. You are playing for the long term. Others do not recognize the long term and want to take their best shot. You have a bankroll that allows you to go through a grind of small wins so that you can play more hands-- you also have the time to do that. Others do not have the bankroll or the time -- OR THE PATIENCE -- to play the long term strategy that you adhere to. And what differeces Singer has only apply to the smallest percentage of overall hands played.

In my last outing at bonus I was dealt a full house with three aces only once in some 7 hours of play. So taking a shot at quad aces in one hand out of seven hours is not such a crime.

Aha! Another obvious doubter troll. You must be Singer. No, I'm Singer. No BearsandBeats is Singer. No, melbadewey is Singer.......

Are you telling me you've never heard about Singers belief that the VP machines are not really 'random'?
That there are secret regulations that require they have secret programming so that each machine has to meet certain high and low payoff parameters?

Singer believes that secret programming is the cause of hot and cold cycles and further he believes he can identify what cycle a machine is in.


One discussion of many

Fail ... Singer is the one who claims that his ability to find hot machines is what makes him a winner. You really should have a clue what you are talking about before making these kind of silly statements.

BTW, when you claim it "makes sense" to reduce your ER, it shows you are completely lost. It appears no amount of common sense or logic is ever going to sway you from being an easy mark.

It's a fairly high variance game where one can generate big wins even without RFs. So, my winning sessions have been a lot more than my losing ones.

I do not use any kind of money management system. No need to when you have a decent advantage. Just make sure one's bankroll is sufficient and play when you feel like it. I usually play once a week for around 6 hours in the summer. Can't interfere with my golfing 4-5 days a week.

Nope, you can do whatever you want. Just quit trying to claim it "makes sense" or will lead to "big wins". Just play however you want and quit trying to frame your own personal strategy as something better.

OK folks, here's a Singer response from Hawaii that he asked me to post. I really haven't read it yet since its so long and I'm in a poker tournament. So here it goes!

Thanks to BAGIANT for posting this. We arrived back this morning—but just for today. Dan did read what I sent into Alan Mendelson’s forum from Hawaii. Please no excuses this time. It makes no sense to propose a challenge without rules. You did not identify financial limitations, I proposed that plus an escrow amount, you lowered them significantly, so I compromised greatly -- and you still waffle. Stop looking for LVA forum help to calm your nerves and let’s get it done.



Arci, it’s so funny watching you pretend you didn’t know I made the post on Alan’s forum when you actually RESPONDED to it! Don’t you just hate it when the truth comes back to haunt you? And I “lied about vacations” here before? Only you would say that. In fact, we’re leaving for several more days to LV & Pahrump tomorrow morning. Just because YOU can’t take vacations any more doesn’t mean WE can’t! J Oh BTW, that “bad taste” in my comments about his ailing wife on a different forum? File it under the “What Goes Around Comes Around” section. He’s simply getting back that which he spawned on the very vile videopoker.com….and he’s getting it back IN SPADES.



Dan’s original challenge: - albeit said somewhat emotionally, as he usually is whenever he talks about me: “Here's something to consider and put your money where your big mouths are. Come to Vegas, find a vp game that you like to play (remember, the crappier the pay schedule, the easier it is to win, right?), play 30 hours at a minumum of 500 hands per hour and we'll match your results with real money. If you're a winner after that time, I'll double your winning. However, if you lose, you now owe me an equal amount of your loss. Pick any game/denomination/location you'd like. I'll be here waiting.....it will be the most lucrative play in town for me.”



First error: Those “two twits” indeed are not me, just like any of those other claims of banjo etc. have never been me. My ISP’s are blocked. That’s why I asked Bob to respond to respond here for me. I have a laptop and a smartphone that I could use wirelessly to slip in any time I want, but I don’t. Casinoboss (read: gullible) really isn’t me, but I started that spoof by sending posts thru a friend in LV and now he mostly gives his own input. The paranoia over me, then record-breaking threads in my honor, is a laugh.



You’ll notice in his “challenge” Dan claims he will “match my results with real money”. It’s very apparent at the time he posted this he had no idea whatsoever what my play strategy entailed. Those other “twits” so rattled him that he never realized for his challenge to be taken seriously by me, it needed some major holes filled. On the other forum and via my acceptance, I did that very clearly.



Dan did say “Find a vp game that you like to play”. In all probability he wrote those words without a bit of knowledge of how I play. It looks like he thought I’ve been saying I can beat any –EV machine using one denomination with my special plays. Now that he’s “discovered America” as they say, he’s using every bit of spin he can think of to get out of the bet. And I’ll let him off the hook if he admits he wasn’t prepared for either making glaring errors in the challenge, or for what it’s like making such a challenge to someone who’s far more knowledgeable in video poker math than he is.



Here's the basic strategy in very condensed & simple terms. Now the critics can’t lie about knowing what it’s all about: Play 100 credits on BP. Get up 40 credits minimum at any time then cash out and restart. This can happen more than once and will only stop if a minimum +$2500 in profit is accumulated. 40 credits are now in soft profit, never to be risked again. Lose the 100 credits and play 300 credits on SDBP. Cashout every time a minimum 40 credits are won, but if after one or several cashouts you recover the lost 100 credits plus you attain at least a 40 credit profit, then you go back to 100 credits of BP.

Lose the 300 credits on SDBP then play 100 on $2 BP. Here you continue doing the same 40 credit minimum thing, and if you recover all $1 losses ($400) plus attain at least a 40 credit minimum profit (and the soft profit bank is filling up slowly) you go back to $1 BP. (The underlying concept here is that only severe addicts go UP in denomination when they win). If 100 credits are lost on $2 BP, play 300 on SDBP. Continue following the exact same path as above thru all required denominations until the soft profit bank totals at least $2500 AND you have recovered all previous losses.



Since my play can be on the $1/$2/$5/$10/$25/$100 machines in each session (a session, on avg., lasts 3 hours) AND BECAUSE DAN MADE NO MENTION OF HOW HIGH HE WANTED TO GO TO MATCH MY WINNINGS I SUGGESTED AN AMOUNT & THAT WE NEEDED AN ESCROW SINCE I WON’T PLAY WITHOUT ONE, THAT WAS COMMENSURATE WITH THAT LIMIT. So I proposed a high number of $300,000, because it is entirely possibly, no matter how unlikely, that I win at least or more than that should I need to go to the $100 machines multiple times in order to attain my minimum $2500 profit for each session. Dan agreed we need one but wants $30k, not $300k. What you WON’T see posted over here is how arci painfully tried to save face for Dan on this issue on the other forum, and it’s nothing different than he’s been trying in vain to do over the years for every AP I’ve ripped in front of him. Some of that same attitude got him in trouble on vpFREE and led to him being one of the very very few who’s ever been permanently banned from that forum. How it must hurt the guy knowing I post there regularly these days…. I’ve taken out the part about paying AC for holding the escrow. Dan can set that up.



I tried to mock him into coming up with the $300k, by asking him to contact all those supposed “AP’s who win every year that he says he knows that lurk mysteriously on the streets on LV” for backing if he couldn’t handle it by himself. The result was his disappearance. Now he’s making believe it was he who came up with the escrow requirement. Now, he’s sweating. His own words do that to him. He finds solace in the few posters here who tell lies about me. But it’s obvious the great fedomalley’s image has been irrevocably changed. Those nickel & quarter 5 & 10-play royals aren’t gonna help him now.



On Alan’s forum FROM HAWAII (aloha arci!) via smartphone, I came up with and posted what is a very generous compromise. I lowered my escrow requirement to $75,000 each, with the understanding that I have the right to quit immediately upon attaining or surpassing that profit amount—whether it be in the first session or the 5th or whatever. Dan may also call it quits if I were to reach a $75,000 loss, thereby locking up HIS guaranteed profit. Beyond $75,000, we just don’t trust each other to pay up without a higher escrow. It is simple common sense. I’ll do it for $75k, $30k, $25k or ANY ridiculously low amount, but since there’s no way to get paid once I win over that amount then I’ll quit playing at that point.



So there it is: Dan neglected to address escrow amount or limits, so I proposed $300,000, Dan balked and countered with $30,000, and so I compromised with $75,000. I CAME DOWN $225,000, and AP Dan can’t GO UP $45,000? So who’s really trying to get this to fruition and who’s trying to be the betting weasel? And what will any of this prove? In the end all it will really prove is Dan didn’t know what he was doing, he bit off way more than he can chew, and he really knows NOTHING about me. I’ll win my sessions at the same ~80%-85% rate no matter if I play 3, 30, 300, or 3000 hours. If these guys really know how to read the math, what they’ll see is I may be at 67% or 97% early on, but the more sessions I play the closer to the 80%+ expectation win rate I’ll get. Lots of “smaller” $2500+ winners, some large losers, and many more large winners is how I’ve won over $984,000 in 10 years without any slot club fluff. Preparation, bankroll, math, special plays based on math that enhance short-term expectation, extreme discipline, taking maximum advantage of any good luck that appears, a return to the smallest denomination after a win is achieved, and an acceptance that luck is the only determining factor in anyone’s video poker play. THAT is how this has been such a consistent success, and THAT is why it AP’s loathe it.



If we can get to an agreement on the above, there are still some minor areas in comparison that need to be discussed. Again, I brought these up on the other forum, Dan read them, but he isn’t talking about them here—which even more makes him look like he can’t really stomach the challenge he himself proposed. Laughlin/LV vs. only LV (& I deferred this to Dan to locate the 2 games I play in LV); & playing 30 hrs. or 15,000 hands. Can’t guarantee I can do both at once with all the W2G stoppages and cumulative calculations going on. And Dan, I don’t think you really want to go 300 hours. It’ll ruin you, and just think of what life would be like being forced to take normal vacations to locations with no vp machines that you & the missus play all day and night.



I’M NOT GONNA ASK bagiant TO POST ANYTHING ELSE. Just get back to me via e-mail @ [email protected] hopefully with an agreement. I’ll read the dumb comments here as the thread goes into typical record-breaking mode. But how about manning up to your challenge, and admitting that when you attack me you’re really going after someone you really have no clue about.

Arc, the point is you can NEVER get four aces when you hold a full house with three aces. Singer will use the opportunity of having three aces to try for the fourth ace. So will others. Maybe I'll start doing it too.

Yes, I am well aware of Singer's allegations/belief that VP machines are not random. There is even an interview video on the web about it.

But never in all of the videos of his "special plays" and never on his website or in his articles have I ever seen him mention his belief in hot and cold streaks to justify how he played a hand. If you have seen such a comment by Singer that hot or cold streaks affect how he plays a particular hand, please give us a link to it here and I will stand corrected.

Im going to say it again: there is a lot of falsehoods and hysteria surrounding Singer and some of it just feeds on itself. The internet is a vicious game of "telephone."

When you come down to it, what Singer does is not so outrageous: he has money management, he has a win goal and knows when to quit, when he wins he plays at lower denominations to lock in a win instead of risking his win at higher levels, he will take a chance when an opportunity is presented to him for a bigger win than for just a grind. And when he loses he will move up in denomination with the hope of getting a win at a larger denomination that will wipe out his losses and will let him meet his win goal.

that to me makes a lot more sense than grinding away without a budget or win/loss limits. Because how many times can you be busted before you have no more money to try again?

I think those of you who still disagree with my opinion should contact Singer directly. He was bold enough to put his email address on the other message forum. Let us know what he says.

Sure he can, it will come in either the form of tomdoug or possibly yourself.