Intro Rob Singer

Is this hurting you so much that you can't read?

Most "followers" don't have the money to invest in gambling an amount that will get them to where I am, and they would never get there with a $25 minimum win goal/week anyway. And most aren't interested in playing any more than they are now. You're simply using it as a tool of criticism, and are refusing to allow yourself to understand why they do what they do. I don't really have a problem with that. Most of my critics lose consistently, and I understand where they're coming from.

If you'd get a kick out of gamblers who have a consistent method of walking away with small wins, then I'd say you'd benefit greatly from how to do it. I see why you don't really want to hear about it, and why slingshot bothers you so much with his "small wins" yet has no interest in doing much more than that. It's all unfolding before your very eyes, and it's hard to handle.

I also see why you brought up this guy John Patrick. He's all about making money off of other people, like all those sports-betting creeps do as they call thousands up every week with their "can't lose picks". Anyone who actually wins consistently doesn't need other people's money.

 

Yes people who claim consistent wins throughout their life using a method but only settling for small wins when there is a bank vault of money awaiting them if they just build their bankroll little by little and do what comes naturally.........bet more and win more...,,,makes me suspect.

 

Only addicts would try to do what you think is done Larry. Normal gamblers couldn't care less about "building a bankroll" so they can play more and higher limits...and professionals already have the needed bankroll. I originally suspected that you really didn't know what you were talking about, and you've confirmed that. Over & out.

You may now spend the rest of your time here talking to mickey about how he wins 6-figures every year playing nickel keno in Montana. I think THAT's the level of conversation you've been looking for.

 

Anyone who recognizes that they have a method that wins consistently would do as I suggest.
Anyone who says that they have a method that wins consistently and doesnt in reality do so, knows in the back of their minds that they really do not win consistently, and lose more than they win, and therefore would never bet more to win more.,,that would be silly....so they hold back and continue to play their small amounts

A "sick gambler" would continually bet more to win more even though they have no real winning method.
A "SMART gambler" seeing that their supposed "method" works consistently, would by all means try to milk the casino for as much as they can. Its human nature.

The shining light is that people stray from human nature when there is uncertainty. And If they have a method that they know in their hearts is not really a winner...then of course they will bet small amounts. Their results would not give them the confidence to bet larger amounts. THAT is human nature.

Billy Walters, in sports betting, started betting smaller amounts. As he sees his method working, and his bankroll swelling, he bets more, wins more and on and on, until now he is betting 6 figures on games...sometimes more. THAT is human nature. THAT is NOT the behavior of a "sick gambler". He did what should come naturally to someone who has a consistent winning method.

But if someone following your methods did what Billy Walters did...you would label them a sick gambler. Nice try.

But if someone followed your consistent winning methods and did what Walters did,..I would label them a prudent sane gambler...doing what any sane person with a winning method would do.
Billy WALTERS gives us a blueprint of what a sane gambler with a consistent winning method would do with their money.

 

The only thing this guy Singer is consistent at, is being a 100% bullshit artist.

 

The same for any "consistent winning method".
Craps players with a "consistent winning method" continue to be red chips when the dice dont know the difference between red and black chips.
So isnt it better to consistently win a stack of black chips rather than a stack of red chips.

Isnt it better to win 600 five dollar credits in VP than to win 600 fifty cents credits.

If I had a consistent winning method, I certainly would want to win 5 dollar credits over 50 cent credits. That doesnt make me "sick" that makes me sane.

 

Larry, Rob is now doing to you what he has done to everyone that Continues to ask him probing questions. No matter how many times you ask him, he has no cogent answer for why he supposedly beat negative expectation games for ten years running. So he deflects the questions by resorting to ridiculing the questioner.

 

I know. Only "addicts" would take a money making system and try to maximize profits.

Sane people will supposedly take a money making system and hold back the reins and say "I only want to make small gains or else I will be labeled an addict"

this is what I am supposed to believe.

When I asked where are all the testimonials of people saying they did the same as Mr Singer.....the answer I get is that no one starts with his bankroll.

So fair enough,,,The next step is that if they have a lower bankroll, and his consistently winning system,,,why cant they slowly but surely attain his bankroll....and then mimic his results from that point

And the answer is.....then they would be addicts if they did that

I must have missed that day of logic class....because this just doesnt compute.

 

Since you don't know or care to know- in Rob's strategies, if you don't leave after a big win, the strategy says you go DOWN in denomination. Not UP.

 

so what, so you consistently win, and leave the casino with extra money. Who care how you got there. You can do the hokey pokey and turn yourself a round to get the win. You can stroke a rabbits foot. You can increase and decrease your bets. However you want to get those consistent wins....its fine

But as you consistently win, your bankroll grows, and you can start new sessions betting more. And as you build that bankroll, and bet more...you win more.....and it goes on and on.

Oh yeah,,,,,only sick gamblers with a consistent winning system would do that.

My guess....is there is no consistent wins, ad therefore no increase in bankroll....and that explains why people are not filling the message boards that follow RS, extolling the virtues of this winning method and raking in 100 k a year/

 

OK, Larry. You win. I only came here to see if any new discoveries in Rob's ideas were discussed. I think The Undeniable Truth was pretty much the completed work and only a person's creativity sets the limits. VP forums no longer have an appeal and I wish all good luck.

 

BTW, I only meant go down in denomination for the day.

 

The one thing that is most important among all strategies is that you develop the skill to cashout when your method signals it's time to cashout. For the past 7 years I've kept records in excel of my session performances. I tracked two sets of numbers, my theoretical profit if I operated my method perfectly, and the actual profit that I ended up with. I knew from my day job, that my ability to follow my method is far more important than spending years trying to find the perfect method. Your method needs to be one that fits your personality and your tolerance for the following: volatility, risk, and the reward for your risk should be something that is meaningful to you, something that makes following the plan when you are winning or losing something that you really want to do. So from the years of detailed session data that I recorded (from Harrah's rincon in the south, the the desert casinos in California, to Laughlin, to Las Vegas, to the northeast) I concluded that my improvement would be how well I learned to follow my own rules. As an aside,I found no significant differences in wins between Indian and non-indian casinos. I found no significant differences in losses in most cases. My success (read: my overall profit from video poker) was and continues to be completely dependent upon me following my rules (session bankroll, non-use of casino ATM, cashing out and leaving the casino at predetermined goal, not drinking, etc.), and not dependent on paytables, city, amount the casino club comped me: rooms, cashback, food, trips, etc.

I come from an arena that espouses the same myths as casinos: financial trading ( read: the businesses that support bilking the public of billions of dollars per year). One myth is that there is a long term for the individual, and that if you follow some canned strategy that may have worked in the past , that it will continue to work. Anyone selling a system in trading should be making their money from actually trading, not selling methods or books. All the best information on trading I got was mostly handed to me by mentors, some I paid for, but very little. The internet you can find everything you need to know if you look, for now I suppose.

The exact same money management and mythology can be applied to video poker. The key is, if you are losing money and I just assume most players are losing money, do you have the will it takes to transform your beliefs and attitudes about what you are doing enough to transform yourself from a losing video poker player to a winning one? Losers can't transform themselves, that's what winners do. I consider myself a winner each time I follow my plan, because it works. When I deviate from that, I am asking for a non-systemic drawdown that takes a while to recoup.

The key to my success was to develop a system I liked (where I was happy with the bankroll volatility and the rewards were meaningful to me) and then to follow that plan and stop playing at the correct time. There are a million ways to play the money game, make your plan that works for you, then follow your plan. Both are necessary, and the ability to follow the second part is what separates the amateur loser from the profitable professional.

 

In addition, there are health factors to consider when working inside a casino. You need to protect your lungs against the smoke filled air. Ever noticed how most older bartenders are always sick? It takes a few years but it happens to them. The young ones are ok. There are also ways to do that easily, inexpensively and effectively. Again, something a winner would do, if this indeed was going to be their profession. All the information is out there for those who want to look.

 

this quote is from Larry S above "My guess....is there is no consistent wins, ad therefore no increase in bankroll....and that explains why people are not filling the message boards that follow RS, extolling the virtues of this winning method and raking in 100 k a year/".

Guessing and knowing are two different things. If you would track your sessions, you would not have to guess as much. As I mentioned before, the fact that winning methods exist is not in itself enough to become a profitable gambler.. The other necessary condition is that any gambler, trader, etc. actually follow (execute properly) the winning system. The inability to follow a systematic strategy is the main reason why people in these positions fail. The secondary reason is not having a winning system. To put it another way, the fact that Larry S "guesses" that nobody is pulling at least $100K a year from video poker has nothing to do with the existence of profitable methods.

Take blackjack and card counting. The fact that most blackjack players lose doesn't mean that a winning strategy does not exist, counting cards is a skill that takes dedicated practice. Very few will take the necessary steps they need to take inorder to become skilled. Well then of course you need to play without greed so you don't get caught (when you vary your bets, don't be a fool). Just because you are fat doesn't mean that there are not ways of eating that will make you thin, they key is how do you retrain your beliefs about eating so you take different actions. How many people look for get rich quick schemes to make money, surgical procedures to make them thin ? Probably 90% of all people. That's precisely why 10% of most people make over 90% of all the money . Why about 10% of people are truly healthy. Those Pareto ratios are everywhere. The success is in training yourself to do the right thing, not that the right thing doesn't exist.

Any profession takes time to become skilled. How much time is up to the individual. But if you really want to be profitable at video poker, it may take some time. You might also consider that with the amount of work involved, you would be better off just working as an employee for a living. Once you are successful, you may realize that you don't want to work in smoky casino for the rest of your life. Once you are successful, playing video poker becomes a lot more boring although it might be satisfying. It's less exciting than when you were an undisciplined loser without a plan or without the will to follow the plan. They are both work, nothing is free, and there are no free lunches.

 

@RobSinger can you tell is this possible also to win by flat betting without increasing betting size in online video poker. Im up so far few hundreds, but would like to know how long the highest drawback of losses can happen before trying to increase the unit size