I agree that the Singer-bashing has gotten a bit too personal. And I also
agree that he should be able to gamble his own money in whatever way he desires,
much like watching a blackjack tablemate doubling a hard 16 against a dealer
ace. All you can do is cringe and wait for the carnage.
However, the root of the majority opinion here is that he's gone over the
line by not only trying to teach his mathematically unsound methods to an
uneducated public, but that he also prolifically (and almost gleefully) bashes the
proven mathematical realities of VP as well as the teachers of those realities.
He occasionally does the latter in a very abrasive and even personally
insulting manner. That is what sets off the folks in this forum.
Just my 2 cents.
- Brian in MI
In a message dated 9/12/2005 6:26:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, hewolf@cox.net
writes:
There is a lot of criticism on this board of Rob Singer. For example, one
fellow wrote recently and I quote: " Some good would come from allowing Rob
Singer to post here. By allowing him to post foolish theories and letting the
rest of the board have at it, it would help people who may be taken in by his
other advertisements to understand the error in his reasoning". This message
would have been all right had not the word "foolish" been in there. Sure, it
is not a big deal, but why use this word. It makes the whole message
unnecessarily aggressive. Also, " Some good would come from allowing Rob Singer to
post here". Who has the right to allow or not to allow. As long as a message is
polite and does not attack anybody aggressively and is based on facts and
opinions, not even our administrator, whom I personally respect very much for
his work, has the moral right to expel this person. And this person, Rob
Singer, contributes a lot more to this group than some others who criticize.Why bash Rob for his way of gambling? As I see it he just adapted and
modified a method used for 100 years by Roulette players who doubled their bet
until at the end they got their money back and a little bit more. I don't want to
dig too deep into this, but if Rob is happy with this system why not let him
do it? After all, we gamble to have fun, don't we? I myself always play
little mental games while I play and that gives me so much fun, I would not miss
it. And when my wife is a little bit depressed when we have a bad day and
lose 1000 Dollars I tell her not to worry about the loss because it is true, we
lost 1000 $, but we had fun worth 1150 Dollars. It is all relative.The great Mao Tse Tung said: Many roads lead to Rome, and Helmut says: There
are many ways to gamble.Administrator: I know this message is far too long. If you want, cut half of
it off and throw the other half away. But I had to get this Rob-Bashing
thing off my chest.Helmut
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]