Oh, Richie Rich. When will you ever learn. But I'll let you off the
hook here. I will put up $350k against yours, that I will be ahead
after 50 sessions of playing MY play strategy with no modifications,
alterations, or anything as stupid (99.2% or less) as the previous
foolish offer with the built-in escape clause. Every session I play
counts, so don't use the feeble excuse that the verifier may not be
there so it doesn't. 24 hrs. notice, and my schedule only. I can get
the Westin to hold the escrow like they did for me before--which they
will be more than happy to do because it'll take probably 15 months
or more to play 50 sessions. They get the interest. We'll wait 2
weeks to begin because I'm going to let my next column belittle the
last bet and the way "Congo" slipped out of it. Then I'll post this
one the next week for public knowledge. you get the atty. to draw up
the papers, and I'll get with TV3 again and see if they believe me
this time around that there really will be a bet.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Brodie" <richard@b...>
wrote:
Rob Singer, an Internet troll who writes an unpaid column for the
advertising circular "Gaming Today" given away in casinos, spins
tall tales
of winning hundreds of thousands of dollars using his Martingale
progression
on negative video-poker games. However, he has refused to bet
anyone that he
can win consistently and, in a curious smoke screen, when he
refuses to take
the bet he declares that is in fact the challenger who has backed
out of the
bet. He has done this a few times so I decided to offer a bet and
document
the ensuing discussion.
Prior to this, I had offered to bet him his $2500 stop-win against
his
$57,200 stop-loss that he would not win any given session of play.
He
pooh-poohed that offer and ridiculed me for offering a bet that
wasn't even
money, saying all fair bets are even money -- this from someone who
claims
to play video poker for a living. Nevertheless:
1) At Singer's request for an even money bet, I posted this:
Tell you what. Here's bet for you: $250,000 that you'll lose money
over the
next 50 sessions of your system, played exclusively on games with
optimal
payback less than 99.2%.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2500
2) Singer posted this:
Let me guess what your escape clause is here....OK, I got it. Since
you know I'll win regardless of the pay tables, duh, you know the
logistics of verifying I do what you want is impossible. So that's
how you'll sneak away this time.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2502
3) I addressed his concern:
Not at all. We just have to set up a time and place and get a
referee. Any
sessions you play that are not observed by the referee don't count,
but the
bet continues. Do you accept?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2503
4) Singer is petrified at the idea of verification and tries to
ridicule the
idea:
A referee? 50 times in 50 places? Guess why you can't do that,
Einstein. I don't even know what time of day or night I'll be in LV,
Laughlin, Tahoe or Reno or even when until the day before I leave--
and this 'referee' is supposed to be on call 24 hours a day all over
the state for over a year? HA! That's not even a nice try. And
besides, unlike you where you play to feed an addiction, I play for
a
living. That means No Bozos. Now let's see if all that self-
proclaimed intellect can come up with something real, and leave the
theories and sissification at home.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2504
5) I hold his feet to the fire:
That's why I said you could play all the unobserved sessions you
want and
they wouldn't count for the bet. Just let us know when and where
and, if the
referee can be there, the session will count for the bet. If not,
we'll just
go to the next one. Eventually we'll get 50. If you chicken out and
stop
playing you lose the bet. So now we're down to your last-ditch
objection,
that your system doesn't work if anyone is watching. So how about
it? Are
you willing to put your money where your mouth is?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2505
6) He pretends to accept, but immediately changes the key condition
of the
bet: that all the sessions be verified, saying that he will go at a
moment's
notice anywhere he wants to play and if the verifier misses it we
have to
take his word for it.
OK, let's give it a try. I'll be in Laughlin at the Colorado Belle
tomorrow (Thurs.) overnight - as I typically travel overnight -
somewhere around 2-3am IF I don't stop to sleep somewhere along the
way. If I do then I have no idea when I'll get there. And even if I
don't, if I'm tired when I arrive I'll take a nap first, then play
if
I'm not hungry. And I may even feel like playing next door first at
the Edgewater, or across the street at the Ramada--all depends on
how
I feel whenever it is that I'm ready to play. Many times I start off
in Laughlin then go somewhere in LV or even up to Reno. Depends how
I
feel. If you read my strategy, SCHEDULE is not a part of it, and I
never fly on such trips. Make sure you're verifier has a car that'll
be able to travel at a moment's notice. So who you got to handle
this....and the trips are all similar, regardless of which end of
the
state I decide to start in. Name & number and I'll give him or her a
call right now to get started. $250k over 50 trips. No skipping
trips, and I have one year to complete them. If the verifier doesn't
show then too bad--you take my word for it. So if I were you I'd be
prepared to be that verifier at such sessions. Winner take all if
I'm
$1 ahead by the end. I suggest you also be there tomorrow
night/morning with someone mutually agreeable and with a
recognizeable name that'll take the cash from both of us--which I
can
get tomorrow during the day. I'll forego the objection of having
someone watching me play because I know that person will be far more
uncomfortable than I am. If you accept you will send me your tel.
number by private e-mail, and I will write an article for GT as soon
as you accept putting it up in public so there will be no
misunderstanding. It will be written up exactly as we have here. I
will also get Channel 3 LV to cover the bet story if you agree. If
it
goes the same as the Fezzik bet, we'll both need to be there for
filming at the beginning, when we sign papers--which will be
tomorrow. I say let's do it! Game EV doesn't matter to me.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2506
7) I reiterate that if the verifier misses a session it won't count
and that
he doesn't get to call a 2 a.m. meeting in Laughlin, and reiterate,
as we
had discussed in prior bets that he declined, that the play must be
on
negative games:
Let's get the cash and the referee taken care of before we start
talking
about 2 a.m. anything.
If it's too last-minute, we'll just skip it and go on to the next
session.
The bet is $250k that you will lose money playing exclusively games
with an
optimal return of 99.2% at most over 50 sessions of your system,
where you
must win $2500 or lose $57,200.
<<No skipping trips, and I have one year to complete them. If the
verifier
doesn't show then too bad--you take my word for it.>>
Nope. That wasn't the bet. I explicitly said 50 verified sessions,
and if
one isn't verified we go on to the next one.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2508
8) Singer lists a number of games all of which have paytables that
return
over 99.2% and says he will play those. He clarifies the win and
loss goals
for his strategy. He refuses to accept the bet unless the rules are
that the
verifier must keep up with him for 50 straight last-minute trips:
I play BP and then 10/7 DB, SDB, TBP+, DDB, or Super Aces in that
order, and I don't care who has what. I just sit down where I'm
comfortable, and whatever game is there is the one I play. You don't
have to worry about the higher limits because few places carry
>99.2%, and I'm not gonna fuss over noise-level percentages. Next, I
never lose $57,200 in a session because of the cashouts along the
way. My strategy says that when I'm done I'm done, and I go home win
or lose--however much over the $2500 I am or however much the loss
amount is. It could be $57,200 but it hasn't happened in 250
sessions.> <<No skipping trips, and I have one year to complete them. If the
verifier doesn't show then too bad--you take my word for it.>>
>
> Nope. That wasn't the bet. I explicitly said 50 verified sessions,
and if one isn't verified we go on to the next one.That's peanuts and you know it. Don't tell me you're reaching for
your book of escape clauses again. If we're going to do this and I'm
the one playing and travelling, then you'll find a verifier that can
keep up with me for 50 straight sessions/trips. Pick a young guy,
because that's the only type that could handle it.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2510
9) I reiterate the terms of the bet, accept his clarification of
win/loss
goals, and take him to task for making unreasonable demands:
In the first place, I'm not going to Laughlin at all or to anywhere
at 2
a.m. You'll need to have the $250k on deposit with someone I trust,
along
with a signed agreement, before I believe you're serious about the
bet. You
already welshed on a $2 million bet with me so obviously you cannot
be
trusted. Beyond that, you've already started your game of modifying
my offer
and then claiming it's I who am weaseling out. I have very little
confidence
that you will ever accept this bet.
The bet was all negative games with optimal paybacks under 99.2%.
I'm OK with keeping the cashouts as long as you follow the strategy
of going
to higher denomination machines when you lose and stopping when you
lose 400
credits at $25 or $100, as your strategy dictates.
<<If we're going to do this and I'm
the one playing and travelling, then you'll find a verifier that can
keep up with me for 50 straight sessions/trips.>>That was not the bet, and I'm not willing to accept that change.
Since the bet is largely about calling you out as a liar and fraud,
taking
your word for your results simply wouldn't work. If you were on the
up-and-up, we could actually have a schedule. Your midnight-express
story is
just an excuse to keep from being easily verified.
10) He lays down an ultimatum and threatens to libel me in his
unpaid column
for the casino advertising circular. He confabulates the fact that
he likes
to play in the middle of the night in Laughlin with an appointment
to
formalize the bet that was never made. He now calls his unacceptable
modifications "the bet" and accuses me of backing down. He changes
his story
about the previous $2 million bet he welshed on, now backing off
from saying
he won, claiming it was a joke:
Ahhhh....The cowardly side of you already is popping out. So
you're "not going to Laughlin or anywhere else at 2am"? Funny, you
know that's my playing time for nearly every session, and now that
I'm accepting your bet to test MY play strategy, you're suddenly
discomforted by it all. Tough love. You've got until noon today to
confirm that you or your agent will be at the Belle at 2am'ish, with
the cash, or my article will call you out for what you are--a
yellow-
bellied coward with the fear of Rob Singer within. I've got a GT
photographer scheduled and I'm playing my session that will count
towards the 50. There has been no modification of your offer--you
said I am to play MY play strategy and I will not modify any aspect
of it one bit. If you insert modifications to MY strategy then they
will not be accepted because we are betting on MY strategy and MY
strategy only. If you're truly worried about trusting me, just show
up. What'cha got to lose? You can belittle me all you like if
I 'welsh'. When I make a public bet and write a column in GT about
it, they'd have no part of it or me if it weren't as real as the
Fezzik bet.I'm ready to accept the challenge, I'm ready to publicize the bet
for
validation purposes, I'm ready with the cash tomorrow night, I'm
ready to play my first of 50 sessions while being watched (which is
against my better judgement) and I'm ready with my verifier. This
isn't some stupid war of words for "millions" while I'm pulling your
leg on an Internet forum.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2515
11) He posts a set of ground rules, claiming they come from both of
us, when
they are in fact his modifications:
--The bet is $250k each. Congo says I will not be ahead even $1
after
50 sessions of playing MY Play Strategy that has made me over
$645,000 since 1997. I of course know I will, so in essence this is
a
sucker bet.
--There will be no alterations to my play strategy, such as Congo's
requiring me to ONLY play 99.2% games or lower. Most of the time I
do, and since I don't care WHAT the EV is on any game I play ever,
that's asking me to alter my strategy and I expect he's now
understood that he cannot have it both ways. Whatever the game where
I sit pays--8/5 BP or 7/5 or 6/5--that's the one I'll start off
with.
The same with the advanced BP games in all denominations needed.
--As I understand it, I am to have Congo's representative (or maybe
even him at times) watch 50 sessions for verification. Everyone is
aware of what I said up front and long ago time after time that I do
not play on any particular schedule, ever, and that the logistics of
watching me will never be very easy. But Congo said it's not a
problem, thinking we could simply 'skip over' those where there's no
verifier. That makes no sense. Either he's committed to this or he's
not. I'll give 24 hours notice to the verifier along with a window
of
expected play-start, and where. The 'where' may change, but we'll be
together by then. For what's at stake to go along with Congo's big
mouth claiming I'm a 'liar & a fraud' I'd certainly make sure either
the verifier were to be there for sure or I'd be there.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2520
12) I reiterate the original bet and address his threats and
objections:
<<You've got until noon today to confirm that you or your agent
will be at
the Belle at 2am'ish, with the cash>>
Uh...no. My bet said nothing about going anywhere at 2 a.m. to sign
an
agreement. Before anything is signed, you must agree to the
original bet:
<99.2% machines only and only verified sessions count. Once we
select a
mutually acceptable referee, I will have an attorney draw up an
iron-clad
agreement, which we will give to an escrow company along with the
$250,000
each. If you are unreasonable about giving advance notice, that can
only be
interpreted as weaseling out of the bet. I will find someone who is
willing
to go to Laughlin in the middle of the night, but with at least a
day's
notice. Only verified sessions count, so you can't get out of the
bet or
cheat by making it difficult for the verifier to find you.
<<my article>>
I suggest you consult an attorney about libel laws before
publication.
<<There has been no modification of your offer--you said I am to
play MY
play strategy and I will not modify any aspect of it one bit. If
you insert
modifications to MY strategy then they will not be accepted because
we are
betting on MY strategy and MY strategy only.>>
You just posted two modifications to my bet and now you lie and say
there
was no modification. Shall I assume that means you are declining
the bet?
<< If you're truly worried about trusting me, just show up.
What'cha got to
lose? You can belittle me all you like if I 'welsh'. When I make a
public
bet and write a column in GT about it, they'd have no part of it or
me if it
weren't as real as the Fezzik bet. >>
You've already welshed and I've already belittled you. I have no
interest in
going to Laughlin ever or anywhere at 2 a.m. Clearly you're awake
during the
day since you spend so much of it making a fool of yourself on this
forum.
I'm not worried about trusting you; I have no trust in you
whatsoever.
<<I'm playing my strategy to the letter without change. That's the
bet,
plain & simple.>>
No. The bet has always been games under 99.2%.
<<I'm ready to accept the challenge, I'm ready to publicize the bet
for
validation purposes, I'm ready with the cash tomorrow night, I'm
ready to
play my first of 50 sessions while being watched (which is against
my better
judgement) and I'm ready with my verifier.>>
You haven't even agreed to the bet yet, so I don't see how you can
say
you're ready for anything.
<< This isn't some stupid war of words for "millions" while I'm
pulling your
leg on an Internet forum.>>
You're referring to the $2 million bet that you welshed on?
<<Maybe you'll be able to spend some of that cash you say you have
suing me,
and we'll see who's got the most money>>
What would I sue you for? Backing out of a bet? I knew you were
going to do
that before I started.
<<Time of day should be of NO ISSUE when there's all that money at
stake.>>
Great. We'll do all the sessions in Las Vegas at 10 a.m. then.
<< To show worry over that trivial point is akin to running
scared.>>
Glad you agree.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2524
13) He makes many posts reiterating his ultimatum and threatening
me with
humiliation, whatever that means to him:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2525
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2526
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2530
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2531
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2533
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2534
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2535
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/253814) I tell him I'm not interested in his ultimatum or his
modifications and
say I'm presuming he has declined the bet:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2539
15) He persists, making up quotes I never wrote, and declaring that
offering
a bet implies that I am willing to be in Laughlin at 2 a.m. in 48
hours. As
is his custom, upon losing or backing out, he declares victory:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2540
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FREEvpFREE/message/2541And so ends this chapter in the sad but curious chapter of Rob
Singer,
Internet troll. If only he had devoted his powers to the forces of
niceness.
ยทยทยท
Cogno