vpFREE2 Forums

What EXACTLY is wrong with the Rob Singer Strategy ?

BANDSTAND54 wrote:

I have read a book by Singer and articles on his web page. He claims
a ninety percent win record and over half million in winnings.
Although his thinking is unconventional by mainstream standards and
there is a personality conflict among the "gurus" I see no reason to
dismiss his strategy.

Aside from your personal feelings about the man..what problem do you
have with his method of play?

Ralph,

As suggested by Bill, and pursuant with vpFREE policy, I'm replying
here. I'm hoping the discussion here will be civil. Fequently an RS
discussion proves otherwise.

Let me start by saying that I take Singer's claims at face value. I
personally have no reason not to.

I'm not going to get into specifics of his strategy because I'm far
more concerned for the implications to the average player.

Rob's strategies include advancement of play denomination/volatility
in stepped levels, the goal being to ultimately score a hit that meets
his overall session profit goal.

This is an approach that can only be reasonably adopted by a VERY WELL
staked player. I believe Rob has stated he takes something like a
minimum of $10K to conduct his sessions.

As such, irrespective of merits, it's not a strategy that most players
(myself included) are bankrolled to follow. From that practical
standpoint alone, I don't overly concern myself with the conceptual
soundness of his approach.

I will own up to having one particular admiration for Rob. I believe
him to be extraordinarily disciplined in adhering to his strategy.
That's a critical success factor key for any player and were there
anything a player should come away with, that's the thing of greatest
practical value.

- Harry

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...>
wrote:

BANDSTAND54 wrote:
> I have read a book by Singer and articles on his web page. He

claims

> a ninety percent win record and over half million in winnings.
> Although his thinking is unconventional by mainstream standards

and

> there is a personality conflict among the "gurus" I see no reason

to

> dismiss his strategy.
>
> Aside from your personal feelings about the man..what problem do

you

> have with his method of play?

Ralph,

As suggested by Bill, and pursuant with vpFREE policy, I'm replying
here. I'm hoping the discussion here will be civil. Fequently an

RS

discussion proves otherwise.

Let me start by saying that I take Singer's claims at face value. I
personally have no reason not to.

I'm not going to get into specifics of his strategy because I'm far
more concerned for the implications to the average player.

Rob's strategies include advancement of play denomination/volatility
in stepped levels, the goal being to ultimately score a hit that

meets

his overall session profit goal.

This is an approach that can only be reasonably adopted by a VERY

WELL

staked player. I believe Rob has stated he takes something like a
minimum of $10K to conduct his sessions.

As such, irrespective of merits, it's not a strategy that most

players

(myself included) are bankrolled to follow. From that practical
standpoint alone, I don't overly concern myself with the conceptual
soundness of his approach.

I will own up to having one particular admiration for Rob. I

believe

him to be extraordinarily disciplined in adhering to his strategy.
That's a critical success factor key for any player and were there
anything a player should come away with, that's the thing of

greatest

practical value.

- Harry

Harry

Thank you for your reply.

You are both more experienced and knowledgeable than I. I do not know
your bankroll limits.However, if you were to start play at .25
instead say one dollar I do not believe you would need 10k to play.
If a strategy is returning ninety percent i think its worth the
financial investment.

ralph

jhd72234 wrote:

Thank you for your reply.

You are both more experienced and knowledgeable than I. I do not know
your bankroll limits.However, if you were to start play at .25
instead say one dollar I do not believe you would need 10k to play.
If a strategy is returning ninety percent i think its worth the
financial investment.

Ralph, you may well find that advancement only to $1 machines may not
provide sufficient leeway for the large hit necessary to overcome
earlier session losses to occur before you exhaust the stake you're
willing to allow.

As far as the 90% "success" rate, be mindful of how the wins in those
9 winning sessions may compare to the single losing session.

Under Singer's strategy, the magnitude of losing sessions are pretty
awesome.

- H.