Rob Singer accepts the challenge.

You're spot on correct. This is exactly the conclusion that I came to. The 30 hours is too small a sample size. My primary objective was to discredit his system. I make a typo error and said 30 hours and meant 300. In the end, I figured if I opened my big mouth I'd live with it. I still had a 2/3rd's chance of winning and it would only cost me even money if I lost....in itself the best advantage play that I've had in a while.

It seems that he's posturing on this so instead of wasting any more time, I further clarified what I thought would make sense. If he's not prepared to accept it, both critics and followers of his can come to their own conclusion.

As I see it, he claims that he's a 80-85% favorite walking in to the casino. Why would he not take this advantage to win both casino money and MY money at the same time? I don't know about you but I don't know many (any) people who earn $1k/hr. It's unlikely that this is too paultry an amount, would you agree?

I know this sounds like BS but I'm not doing this to get into a pissing match with him. If any of his followers wanted a similar deal, I'd do this same thing in a heartbeat. It's just simply a good bet. Being Singer, it just becomes icing on the cake.

I continue to ask if one was able to go into a casino and walk out with a minimum of $2,500 80-85% of the time as he claims, how often would YOU do it? I'm thinking that anyone in this country shy of Warren Buffett or Bill Gates would be all over it. There'd be a line at the front door of every casino with standing room only trying to get in. It's simply not believable.

Anyway, it seems that he's posted something yet again. I don't want to continue with banter....let's either agree this thing or move on.

Dan

If Singer is so confident that he will win this challenge he should do it without any money being fronted. If he came out ahead the worst that would happen is that he would have his casino winnings and a debt to collect.

With all this talk of contests, I think we should start one on how long tomdoug will be posting here. Something like this contest: A blast from the LVA Past.

I vaguely remember that one. LOL

I just finished posting my final terms and conditions to Singer for this thing. He can either accept or pass. I don't want to continue dialogue with him.....drawing attention is what he's looking for and I don't want to be party to it. I simply want him to agree with the stipulations, we'll get it written up, get someone to act as escrow agent and get our money to this person. From there, it's simply waiting for D-Day and a chance to make some money from him.

Dan

Hey Dope! I'm asking for the 2nd time, please show me any post I have ever made that supports Singer. The only posts I make about video poker and APers are ones questioning never ending winning.

TomDoug will be here for a while. By the way, did PokerWayne lose his house yet?

Here's one of my favorites.

The original Banning of Rob Singer.

Little known fact...We can post again in the LVA sports forum...so as a tribute I bumped it.

This is a person who uses an assumed name to advocate a Martingale type system as a way to beat VP. Why would anyone CARE in any way about anything he says or does? A loose screw?

Why don't you two guys agree to donate winnings to charity?

Hey Dan, Rob reads the "Vegas Free-for-All". Last time I checked you don't need to register to read this forum.

The reason Singer claims he has a 80% chance of winning is due to the Martingale like progressive system he uses. If he plays all 5 levels then he does have an 80% chance of winning any single session. However, when you factor in 30K hands that means he will need to play 5-10 sessions. Since his losses at 5 levels will likely be in the $40-50K range just one loss can lead to losing overall. He would need to win just about every session to come out ahead unless he hits a big winner at the top two levels.