As far as I've been able to determine, Rob Singer does not utilize a strategy of any kind other than possibly intuitive play. Everything he write about (other than criticizing mathematically sound real strategies) are his TACTICS. At the most basic level, they consist of a progressive betting scheme -- if you're losing, move to a higher denomination machine, and damn the payoff schedule.
Bob Dancer, on the other hand, would never consider playing any game without first learning and practicing a computer-generated strategy, and he would never play a game at less than 100% expected return. He espouses and teaches mathematically sound strategies and tactics. By sound tactics, he tells you to never play beyond your bankroll. As far as I can recall, Million Dollar VP does not discuss strategy at all -- only his tactics.
So just what are the similarities between these two men?
1. Neither has ever created or published a playing strategy.
2. Both ignore the mathematics of Risk of Ruin in their own play.
3. Both play both sides of the fence.
4. Both make big money off of their publications.
5. Both are very intelligent, yet they have little or no concern about how their "work" affects other players.
I am not trying to be vindictive about anyone, so please tell me if I'm wrong on any of these points.
Dan
···
"thymos_one" <thymos_one@yahoo.com> wrote:
Since all I know of Rob Singer's strategies is what I have gleaned from
posts on this site, I will take the liberty to ascribe any nutty
gambling strategy him. For dancer his strategy is laid out in his
Milllion Dollar book, which can be read for free at my local Borders,
since no one seems interested in purchasing the lone copy.Bob's strategy seems to be the inverse of Rob's, when you are ahead
move up in denomenation. Bob got very very lucky, and hit big when he
was playing way beyond his bankroll. $500,000 in one night! you don't
do that playing 0.25 or dollars. Even the rest of his story points to a
great deal of luck not skill. If you allow for a 0.3% advantage you
would have to put through $150 million to earn the balance of his
$500,000...that's a huge amount to feed through machines in a year. I
just don't believe that 0.3% advantage or highter are regularly
available on high enough denomenation games to allow for that type of
play. It seems that bob was lucky on the other $500,000 also. So the
real story is if you want to win big...get very lucky! Bob clearly
implies greater profits from video poker than can realistically be
attained...that is not a service to this community.
--
Dan Paymar
Author of best selling book, "Video Poker - Optimum Play"
Editor/Publisher of VP newsletter "Video Poker Times"
Developer of VP analysis/trainer software "Optimum Video Poker"
Visit my web site at www.OptimumPlay.com
"Chance favors the prepared mind." -- Louis Pasteur