The Rob Singer Challenge

I believe, MathE, that you are now hiding behind the fact that Mr. singer is not allowed to be here to refute your bogus claims of accepting a debate sometime in the past. Here's a few questions for you: Do you read German? Do you know how much of his non-numeric details are in that language? Does it not concern you even in the slightest that if he were to give it all to you and you didn't understand it, that you'd feel foolish by telling him that after all this? It seems to me he's just trying to eliminate all the negative variables so a proper review can be had. Why are you so dead set against that, and instead finding solace in making things up about what he's doing and why? As a 3rd party here it's like you're in a fishbowl, and we're uneasy watching you move around on this.

So if he pays for your trip, gets you a hotel, and pays you by the hour to review his work then you'll show up this time to review his data in person like he's requested, IF he deletes the wager you're unable to afford? SO FOR GOD'S SAKE, TELL HIM THAT AND HE JUST MIGHT GO FOR IT! WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO LOSE?

I don't think you're really as clueless about singer as Evenbob portrays. You know he's retired from pro play, he's not selling things, and this is no publicty stunt as far as I can determine. The guy knows the Wizard, he's already offerred to pay him and cover expenses for thecesspit, and what other video poker gambler in the history of LV has ever had the gonads to play in front of witnesses at the highest limits while saying he guarantees a win of at least $2500 at least 8 out of 10 trials or else he'll pay out 50 large?

That's some fraud.

You are still missing the point (and I think, you are doing it on purpose).

It is not МЕ's job to prove Mr. Singer's claims. He is not "hiding" or "ducking" from anything.

He voluteered to analyze and validate Mr. Singer's evidence if it is presented to him. It wasn't. Tough luck.

If Mr. Singer indeed has the evidence, and wants it looked at, analyzed, and validated by experts, it is up to him to find a way for that to be done. If he can't find a way, because it is "too hard to upload", or "too confusing to present" or whatever else his excuse is, that's his problem, not ME's.

Until/unless Mr. Singer finds a way to present his evidence in a way, acceptable to ME (or to any other expert with credible qualifications), the fact remains - no evidence for his outrageous claims has never been presented. It is as simple as that.

Let's summarize:

Singer makes outrageous claim.
People like ME end the Wizard ask to see the evidence
Singer refuses to provide it
Later Singer proposes a debate and a bet, which possibly includes a presentation of his evidence (not clear on this point). Also claims his evidence needs to be explained to be understood.

Oh, yes, I can totally see we're being unfair to Singer. I can also see Ignorance is Strenght.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm blocking JL2

Quote: Nareed

Let's summarize:

Singer makes outrageous claim.
People like ME end the Wizard ask to see the evidence
Singer refuses to provide it
Later Singer proposes a debate and a bet, which possibly includes a presentation of his evidence (not clear on this point). Also claims his evidence needs to be explained to be understood.

It gets worse, because then Singer's acolyte starts yelling at people (in God's name, no less) for not having the faith that he does. Evidence? Who needs evidence. Singer's word must be good, right? A skeptic like me should be willing to bend over backwards -- actually drop what I'm doing and fly to his house -- to review the data he's unwilling to post on the Internet.

Okay, let's test JL2's theory that you don't need any evidence to back up an outrageous claim. More to the point, let's test whether that theory is fairly applied:

I have just received an email from Mr. Singer that confirms he did not simulate 2,314,340,258 hands of video poker using a Rohde and Schwarz testing machine. He didn't do any sort of analysis, and he doesn't have any evidence that the "flip-over" rate is anything other than it should be. Pursuant to forum rules, I will not post this email. You'll just have to take my word for it.

Based on the evidence presented thus far, what is more credible -- Singer's assertion he simulated 2,314,340,258 hands of VP, properly analyzed them, and found the statistical anomaly he claims, or my assertion that he emailed me with an admission to the contrary?

(This is somewhat of a trick question, but there is a correct answer.)

" A skeptic like me should be willing to bend over backwards "

someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs does not seem to be descriptive of you

Quote: buzzpaff

" A skeptic like me should be willing to bend over backwards "

someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs does not seem to be descriptive of you

That's not what skepticism is. Read this:
http://www.skepdic.com/skepticism.html
Quoting therefrom:

Quote: skepdic.com/skepticism.html

Scientific skepticism takes it for granted that the methods of science are the best methods for gaining knowledge and that skepticism is warranted when knowledge claims are made that reject the methods of science, contradict well-established scientific facts or principles, or go beyond the limits of science. Thus, scientific skepticism is particularly critical of paranormal and supernatural claims, and of what is often referred to as pseudoscience. By extension, scientific skepticism considers all extraordinary claims as dubious. Such claims are not to be dismissed as false, however. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" is a commonly expressed mantra among advocates of scientific skepticism.

As Michael Shermer points out, skepticism does not stop with doubting extraordinary or "weird" (as he calls them) claims. Scientific skepticism uses scientific methods to investigate such claims. Scientific knowledge regarding the nature of perception, memory, and human testimony, as well as the tools of critical thinking, are a part of the skeptical inquiry into dubious claims. Finally, scientific skepticism rejects the notion that empirical matters should be taken on faith; beliefs should be based on sufficient evidence, not intuition, authority, or tradition.

Put into those terms, Singer has made an extraordinary claim. He has failed to back it up with extraordinary proof, and that won't ever move the needle on whether Singer's claims are dubious. In order for that to change, he'll need to provide evidence for his claims, which definitely "contradict well-established facts or principles." Singer alone is responsible for the ongoing lack of evidence to support his claims. I personally doubt Singer's conclusions, and I also reject JL2's blind faith to the contrary. Beliefs should be based on sufficient evidence, not intuition, authority, or tradition.

Quote: weaselman

You are still missing the point (and I think, you are doing it on purpose).

It is not ÌÅ's job to prove Mr. Singer's claims. He is not "hiding" or "ducking" from anything.

He voluteered to analyze and validate Mr. Singer's evidence if it is presented to him. It wasn't. Tough luck.

If Mr. Singer indeed has the evidence, and wants it looked at, analyzed, and validated by experts, it is up to him to find a way for that to be done. If he can't find a way, because it is "too hard to upload", or "too confusing to present" or whatever else his excuse is, that's his problem, not ME's.

Until/unless Mr. Singer finds a way to present his evidence in a way, acceptable to ME (or to any other expert with credible qualifications), the fact remains - no evidence for his outrageous claims has never been presented. It is as simple as that.

I'm reading this again in amazement. Did you not read Mr. singer's post? He IS going to provide every detail to MathE if he shows up to review then debate it. Where is your reading problem? Where is the "evidence" that MathE ever contacted him back whenever? He just threw that in because he knew he was looking like he was trying to get out of meeting singer.

Your next point is even more odd. Mr. singer says he has the evidence, and he HAS found a way to have other experts review it! All they have to do is respond. It seems they won't, I can't get them to, and they get to remain in their safe little corners making up things about Mr. singers findings. I also find your depiction of the "upload issue" a little uncharacteristic of someone with intelligence. His way is to do it in person because of how important it is to be reviewed correctly. It seems like a lot of data, there's some language issues that will come up, and there are probably lots of other reasons why too. Any good scientist would want all the answers when reviewing something like this, and the only way for that to happen is for all parties to be present.

I'm seeing that MathE will never do the simple thing and contact the guy BECAUSE HE'S TERRIBLY AFRAID OF MEETING THE GUY FACE-TO-FACE. It has to be that simple. It appears like he just doesn't want his world of believing how the machines work to be destroyed by what Mr. singer has been preaching. What's the safest way to keep that belief in tact? YES, to keep making excuses why he won't contact singer to get the meeting and debate rolling.

MathE, you seem to be wasting a ton of typing time writing the same things over and over that make excuses why you are fearing a face-to-face with Mr. singer, when it would only take a few moments to send him a message asking for those financial covers and to delete the wager portion of the proposal. After all, what OTHER of the big deals here went after THAT one anyway? Yes, their futures remain safe in that they can continue to call him a liar and a fraud from their homes knowing they'll never have to back up their talk with an in-person bet HE proposed....

Please man up and make this happen! And stop soliciting support from some of the others just so you can feel good about ducking it!

Quote: JL2

Please man up and make this happen! And stop soliciting support from some of the others just so you can feel good about ducking it!

You should really address this comment to Mr. Singer. It's his responsibility, and his responsibility alone, to support his own unsubstantiated conjectures. You seem to believe that, since I won't play along with Mr. Singer's silly games, then he's made his case by default. That's simply not true. My presence or absence has nothing to do with the fact that not once has Mr. Singer provided a shred of evidence to back up his tall tales. It's not up to me to go dig that out of him because, frankly, it's not that important to me. I've asked numerous times over the past 3 months to find out what he's talking about -- I've asked via email and on this forum -- and he's refused me every single time. That, as far as I'm concerned, is the end of the discussion. If he changes his mind, so be it. But I wouldn't bet on him changing his mind.

Quote: JL2

Do you read German?

I wonder if he's using Ich Luge bullets.

Quote: JL2

I'm reading this again in amazement. Did you not read Mr. singer's post? He IS going to provide every detail to MathE if he shows up to review then debate it.

Did you read mine?
"is going to ... if" does not work.
Once again, it is not ME's job to comply with Singers ridiculous conditions. If Singer wants ME to review the data, he has to provide it in a way, acceptable to ME. If he does not, that's the end of it. He may find another expert to review it if he wishes, but until he does, as far as the rest of the world is concerned, the evidence has not been provided.

Quote:

Where is your reading problem? Where is the "evidence" that MathE ever contacted him back whenever?

He does not have to contact him (not to say that he hasn't, just to note, that it is irrelevant), and you don't need any "evidence" of that one way or the other.
He volunteered to review Singers data. If Singer wants his data reviewed, he can upload it in the form, acceptable to ME. If he does not know how to do that, he can ask for help. If he does not want to, he can shut up and go away. This exhausts the possibilities.
What he can't do is to demand that ME jumps through hoops and sounds bells and whistles to obtain the data.
You must understand that by agreeing to review the data, ME is doing Mr. Singer a favor, not the other way around. Singer is not in the position to make conditions.
If he can provide the evidence to substantiate his claims, he should provide it. Until and unless he does, his claims remain unsubstantiated.

Quote:

Your next point is even more odd. Mr. singer says he has the evidence, and he HAS found a way to have other experts review it!

No. He needs to find a way, that will be acceptable to at least one of the other experts (preferably, more than one).
So far, he has not come close to doing that.

Quote:

His way is to do it in person because of ...

Does not matter because of what. If he cannot find an expert who agrees to do it in person, he has not made his evidence available to experts. It is his responsibility to make it available, not ME's to come running to see it.

Quote:

how important it is to be reviewed correctly.

The experts are called experts because they supposedly know how to handle stuff in their area of expertise correctly.
If Singer does not believe ME is an expert, he can find another one, who he can trust as well as the general public, and he agrees to look at his evidence. If he does trust ME's expertise, he has to at the very least trust his ability to "correctly" look at a big bunch of numbers.

Quote:

It seems like a lot of data, there's some language issues that will come up, and there are probably lots of other reasons why too.

"A lot of data" is not really a problem at all. "Language issues" he is going to have to take care of anyhow, in person or not. "Other reasons", if they exist, are also his (Singer's) problems, not ME's. If he wants his data reviewed, he has to take care of any issues, preventing that from happening.

Quote:

I'm seeing that MathE will never do the simple thing and contact the guy BECAUSE HE'S TERRIBLY AFRAID OF MEETING THE GUY FACE-TO-FACE.

Even if that was true, it would have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

I generally have enjoyed the 'he said, she said' types of threads for the amusement value alone, since little information actually is presented. To summarize, ME and the Wiz are a well respected member and owner of this forum. RS is a known charlatan. JL2 is also obviously either RS or his agent. So, to ME, my friend, I think your well thought out and factual responses will never amount to anything, as RS will never actually submit to anything reasonable. use your valuable time to anything that he KNOWS he cannot prove. I recommend that you use your valuable time to answer more important questions, like, what are the odds of a 7 card copy hand in pai gow poker (ace, queen, 10, 6,4,3,2) which I of course lost. Interestingly my adjacent player saw my hand and told me to play queen 6 in the low which would have pushed for me. I never do that, but he was able to rib me after the dealer's hand was shown.

Quote: SOOPOO

To summarize, ME and the Wiz are a well respected member and owner of this forum. RS is a known charlatan. JL2 is also obviously either RS or his agent. So, to ME, my friend, I think your well thought out and factual responses will never amount to anything, as RS will never actually submit to anything reasonable. use your valuable time to anything that he KNOWS he cannot prove. I recommend that you use your valuable time to answer more important questions, like, what are the odds of a 7 card copy hand in pai gow poker (ace, queen, 10, 6,4,3,2) which I of course lost. Interestingly my adjacent player saw my hand and told me to play queen 6 in the low which would have pushed for me. I never do that, but he was able to rib me after the dealer's hand was shown.

You're right, of course. Now that it's clear Singer can't/won't reply, and JL2 is doing nothing but covering for that, there's no point in asking further. But just to set a minor fact straight, while I do know the Wiz, I am not part-owner of this forum in any way. As to the important question, WoO has the odds of front copy at 2.55%, back at 0.10%, so by straight multiplication it'd be 0.00255% or about 1 in 39,215. Sorry to hear about that.

Quote: MathExtremist

You should really address this comment to Mr. Singer. It's his responsibility, and his responsibility alone, to support his own unsubstantiated conjectures. You seem to believe that, since I won't play along with Mr. Singer's silly games, then he's made his case by default. That's simply not true. My presence or absence has nothing to do with the fact that not once has Mr. Singer provided a shred of evidence to back up his tall tales. It's not up to me to go dig that out of him because, frankly, it's not that important to me. I've asked numerous times over the past 3 months to find out what he's talking about -- I've asked via email and on this forum -- and he's refused me every single time. That, as far as I'm concerned, is the end of the discussion. If he changes his mind, so be it. But I wouldn't bet on him changing his mind.

You must be a treat to live with. So many times you've seen me suggest you contact Mr. singer BECAUSE HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE HERE ANYMORE and so many times you deflect the discussion to "but it's his responsibility to present the evidence" when you know full well his proposal was presented to do just that. You are sooo hiding behind this. The only reason I can see that he made the proposal to YOU is because you have criticized him for what he said he did. If you were truly interested in discovering his facts then you'd jump on this opportunity, not just keep going on with your rhetoric. Why don't you just admit that you were blindsided by his proposal and never expected him to step forward like that. That would surprise anybody who wasn't prepared past their assumptions.

If you're going to hide from him, at least do it with some dignity. You bad mouth him every chance you get, which is also telltale of your fear of meeting with him.

Math Extremist

someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs

That is the dictionary definition. Yours starts with the adjective SCIENTIFIC.

Different worlds we live in. I am still working on divisor and least common denominator LOL

I just did not want anyone to think that that Mr Singers ranting were an accepted belief

Quote: SOOPOO

I generally have enjoyed the 'he said, she said' types of threads for the amusement value alone, since little information actually is presented. To summarize, ME and the Wiz are a well respected member and owner of this forum. RS is a known charlatan. JL2 is also obviously either RS or his agent. So, to ME, my friend, I think your well thought out and factual responses will never amount to anything, as RS will never actually submit to anything reasonable. use your valuable time to anything that he KNOWS he cannot prove. I recommend that you use your valuable time to answer more important questions, like, what are the odds of a 7 card copy hand in pai gow poker (ace, queen, 10, 6,4,3,2) which I of course lost. Interestingly my adjacent player saw my hand and told me to play queen 6 in the low which would have pushed for me. I never do that, but he was able to rib me after the dealer's hand was shown.

And you're exactly what MathE needs to keep him feeling good about avoiding contacting singer (and ONLY because singer can't post anything here any more and not because of your simple assumptions). BTW, RS as you call him, has already posted a "reasonable" proposal for MathE to respond to, yet he continues to duck answering him. You don't think it's curious how he's now going through all these gyrations knowing "RS" isn't involved in this forum any longer? Why do you believe so many forum members have refrained from chiming in their undying support for MathE like you just gave in to?

Quote: buzzpaff

Math Extremist

someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs

That is the dictionary definition. Yours starts with the adjective SCIENTIFIC.

Different worlds we live in. I am still working on divisor and least common denominator LOL

I just did not want anyone to think that that Mr Singers ranting were an accepted belief

Now there's something that needs translation.

Quote: JL2

You must be a treat to live with. So many times you've seen me suggest you contact Mr. singer BECAUSE HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE HERE ANYMORE and so many times you deflect the discussion to "but it's his responsibility to present the evidence" when you know full well his proposal was presented to do just that. You are sooo hiding behind this. The only reason I can see that he made the proposal to YOU is because you have criticized him for what he said he did. If you were truly interested in discovering his facts then you'd jump on this opportunity, not just keep going on with your rhetoric. Why don't you just admit that you were blindsided by his proposal and never expected him to step forward like that. That would surprise anybody who wasn't prepared past their assumptions.

If you're going to hide from him, at least do it with some dignity. You bad mouth him every chance you get, which is also telltale of your fear of meeting with him.

I say Singer is the one who is afraid and hiding. And you're the one doing the bad-mouthing. I bet we'd have no trouble with the parts that are in German if they were posted here. My sister wrote her thesis in German so I could ask her for help. My mother was German.

Just post the info here, unless you're afraid we WOULD understand it. Try us. I'm sure Singer would trust you to do it for him since he's not allowed to be here anymore.

Weasel, this is the only part of your response that had any meaning:

"He does not have to contact him (not to say that he hasn't, just to note, that it is irrelevant), and you don't need any "evidence" of that one way or the other.
He volunteered to review Singers data. If Singer wants his data reviewed, he can upload it in the form, acceptable to ME. If he does not know how to do that, he can ask for help. If he does not want to, he can shut up and go away. This exhausts the possibilities.
What he can't do is to demand that ME jumps through hoops and sounds bells and whistles to obtain the data.
You must understand that by agreeing to review the data, ME is doing Mr. Singer a favor, not the other way around. Singer is not in the position to make conditions.
If he can provide the evidence to substantiate his claims, he should provide it. Until and unless he does, his claims remain unsubstantiated."

If MathE volunteered to review singer's data, why would you think MathE would reject meeting with him to review it in person? YES, he wants the opportunity to remain anonymous and say how incomprehensible it is since some of it is in a foreign language, and as much as this may shock you, MathE may NOT be able to understand all of the rest of it either from what I gather. If a true scientist, as MathE purports himself to be, had the chance to review another person's controversial findings that piqued his interest as this subject certainly has, would you expect that true scientist do a review from afar knowing the author has already told him he would not be able to understand all the details without explanation....ie, would you want that true scientists findings to be based on an incomplete review? Or would you want as accurate and balls-on a review/report as humanly possibly in a situation such as this? So to you, which is the far more efficient, accurate method of doing the review: over the internet or IN PERSON!? Duh.

It appears your description of MathE jumping through hoops doesn't fit well with his proclamation that he would meet with singer if his expenses were paid. Exactly how would you, as MathE's apologist, expect singer to do that if MathE doesn't want to contact him and ask?

The overall conclusion is clear, and if a dummy like me can figure this out then you mensas can too: MathE is fearful of doing a face-to-face with a person most who post in this thread don't seem to like, but no one will stand up to. Perhaps that's the reason why he's not liked, and that only solidifies the points he tried to get across in his proposal. You're giiving him the credibility you despise and you don't even realize it..

Circular arguments - see this thread.

This is all pissing in the wind with little point.

Quote: JL2

Now there's something that needs translation.

Well Jerry, go in the other room and have Rob explain it to you ?

Quote: FarFromVegas

I say Singer is the one who is afraid and hiding. And you're the one doing the bad-mouthing. I bet we'd have no trouble with the parts that are in German if they were posted here. My sister wrote her thesis in German so I could ask her for help. My mother was German.

Just post the info here, unless you're afraid we WOULD understand it. Try us. I'm sure Singer would trust you to do it for him since he's not allowed to be here anymore.

There's no way to post 2.3B rows of data here. Singer would have to upload the electronic data to his website. If he can't or won't, his case remains unmade.

Quote: MathExtremist

There's no way to post 2.3B rows of data here. Singer would have to upload the electronic data to his website. If he can't or won't, his case remains unmade.

Okay, then put it on the website. I think there's enough math and language knowledge around here to wade through it.

Betcha he won't though.

Quote: JL2

You must be a treat to live with. So many times you've seen me suggest you contact Mr. singer BECAUSE HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE HERE ANYMORE

HE HAS BEN CONTACTED MANY TIMES BY MANY PEOPLE IN THE PAST. Why do it again? We're all dizzy enough already from trying to follow his ridiculous bullsh*t.

Quote: thecesspit

This is all pissing in the wind with little point.

But, but...if I aim juuuuuust right, I can hit Rob Singer in the face:-)

Quote: JL2

It appears your description of MathE jumping through hoops doesn't fit well with his proclamation that he would meet with singer if his expenses were paid. Exactly how would you, as MathE's apologist, expect singer to do that if MathE doesn't want to contact him and ask?

Just to put this to rest, I'm not jumping through any hoops, paid expenses or not. I'm entitled to change my mind, and I hereby retract any offer I may have made to meet with Singer, under any circumstances, until and unless he posts his alleged evidence on his website. If and when that happens, and the alleged evidence is demonstrative of something worth talking about, only then can we reopen the question of an in-person debate. If he continues to dodge the requests, I'm washing my hands of this. I do not blindly trust Mr. Singer enough to get on a plane in the naive hope that he has information on his laptop worth my time to review.

If he posts his evidence on his own website, we can talk again. And no, to be clear, I'm not going to email him *again* and ask him *again* to do this. I've taken "no" for an answer, and I'm not going to argue, beg, or plead. If you don't like his refusal to publicly post his evidence, go ahead and try to get him to change his mind.

And if you think all that makes me a "coward" or means I'm "hiding" or whatever other nonsense you want to ascribe to me, I'm fine with that. At the end of the day, my alleged cowardice notwithstanding, Singer will still have failed to support his conjecture that VP games are unfair. And that's the whole point. My personal traits, whatever they may be, have nothing to do with The Unsupported Conjecture About Video Poker.

Quote: FarFromVegas

I say Singer is the one who is afraid and hiding. And you're the one doing the bad-mouthing. I bet we'd have no trouble with the parts that are in German if they were posted here. My sister wrote her thesis in German so I could ask her for help. My mother was German.

Just post the info here, unless you're afraid we WOULD understand it. Try us. I'm sure Singer would trust you to do it for him since he's not allowed to be here anymore.

So how exactly does that make sense? Mr. singer posts a proposal that has to be considered valid since he's asked for Wizard to participate and they know each other, you already know that that much data, with some German or not, could not be posted here, and reading back through posts and singer's website tells everyone who knows HOW to read that his site was terminated at the end of 2010. It still seems to be there, but I know how site providers are. They kill activity updates and take months or even years to take sites down.

But even still, how is Mr. singer supposed to know what all of you are scrambling around saying if the person he directed the proposal towards does not communicate with him? And if you or yours can read German then why don't YOU contact singer to help get this facilitated? How is it everyone who claims they have an ability of some sort is afraid to contact him?

Quote: rdw4potus

HE HAS BEN CONTACTED MANY TIMES BY MANY PEOPLE IN THE PAST. Why do it again? We're all dizzy enough already from trying to follow his ridiculous bullsh*t.

Please provide evidence for that, I have not seen any. But it's a good safe false statement to make when you don't have to back it up, isn't it.

Quote: MathExtremist

Just to put this to rest, I'm not jumping through any hoops, paid expenses or not. I'm entitled to change my mind, and I hereby retract any offer I may have made to meet with Singer, under any circumstances, until and unless he posts his alleged evidence on his website. If and when that happens, and the alleged evidence is demonstrative of something worth talking about, only then can we reopen the question of an in-person debate. If he continues to dodge the requests, I'm washing my hands of this. I do not blindly trust Mr. Singer enough to get on a plane in the naive hope that he has information on his laptop worth my time to review.

If he posts his evidence on his own website, we can talk again. And no, to be clear, I'm not going to email him *again* and ask him *again* to do this. I've taken "no" for an answer, and I'm not going to argue, beg, or plead. If you don't like his refusal to publicly post his evidence, go ahead and try to get him to change his mind.

And if you think all that makes me a "coward" or means I'm "hiding" or whatever other nonsense you want to ascribe to me, I'm fine with that. At the end of the day, my alleged cowardice notwithstanding, Singer will still have failed to support his conjecture that VP games are unfair. And that's the whole point. My personal traits, whatever they may be, have nothing to do with The Unsupported Conjecture About Video Poker.

It would be nice to have seen you address the point I made about which method a true scientist would rather review previously unseen data that the author has explained could not be understood without his presence, than to provide ANOTHER 500 words worth of obvious excuses why you're ducking any sort of meeting with the guy. Not to mention how you've already said you were done, finished, over with this thread, and now you show what appears to be more guilty feelings over not responding faithfully to his written proposal, not providing evidence that you've contacted him at a time that has no bearing on his proposal, and continuing to ignore the fact that you know he's not here to respond to you yet you keep making up excuses for not e-mailing him as he asked you to do in his proposal. What is it about you that you're trying to protect? Could it be that if he met you and your hidden identity came out he already KNOWS you, and you would be humbled by that release? Oh my God!

Sorry, I haven't been reading this thread, but why is everybody responding to JL2 like he has some sort of credibility here? He joined four days ago. Let the guy go, he is obviously a troll.

Quote: JL2

Please provide evidence for that, I have not seen any. But it's a good safe false statement to make when you don't have to back it up, isn't it.

Oh, that's good one... come on Chuckles, think before you post. You can do better than that.

Quote: teddys

Sorry, I haven't been reading this thread, but why is everybody responding to JL2 like he has some sort of credibility here? He joined four days ago. Let the guy go, he is obviously a troll.

I second that.

Look, people, we're well rid of Jerry, Rob and mkl. Perhaps we've run into a law of conservation of troll annoyance (the annoyance level of trolls in a message baord is constant regardless of the number of trolls involved), but perhaps not. So we have two choices:

1) Ignore the shill until he gets bored and goes away

2) beg the Wizard to invoke the nuclear option

I'd hate to see the nuclear option overused even once, so I vote for the first choice.

Quote: Nareed

I second that.


1) Ignore the shill until he gets bored and goes away.

Another vote here for #1.

Quote: Nareed

I second that.

Look, people, we're well rid of Jerry, Rob and mkl. Perhaps we've run into a law of conservation of troll annoyance (the annoyance level of trolls in a message baord is constant regardless of the number of trolls involved), but perhaps not. So we have two choices:

1) Ignore the shill until he gets bored and goes away

2) beg the Wizard to invoke the nuclear option

I'd hate to see the nuclear option overused even once, so I vote for the first choice.

I vote for nuclear option, but alas, my finger is not allowed on the button......

Quote: SOOPOO

I vote for nuclear option, but alas, my finger is not allowed on the button......

Do you allow fingers on your button? ;)

Quote: JL2

Weasel, this is the only part of your response that had any meaning:

No, you are wrong. Actually, my entire post had meaning. Perhaps, if you try reading it again ...

Quote:

If MathE volunteered to review singer's data, why would you think MathE would reject meeting with him to review it in person?

Perhaps, because it is more trouble than he volunteered for? Because statistical analysis of billions of rows of data is likely to take time and resources that are way beyond what is reasonable for a personal meeting?

Quote:

YES, he wants the opportunity to remain anonymous and say how incomprehensible it is since some of it is in a foreign language,

I don't quite understand what you mean by NUMBERS "in a foreign language", but in any event, if some of the necessary information is in foreign language is will need to be translated (by Singer), so this point is irrelevant to the question of how the data is delivered - it will have to not be in the foreign language (whatever that means) in either case.

Quote:

and as much as this may shock you, MathE may NOT be able to understand all of the rest of it either from what I gather.

If he cannot understand the data, there is no point in him reviewing it.

Quote:

If a true scientist, as MathE purports himself to be, had the chance to review another person's controversial findings that piqued his interest as this subject certainly has, would you expect that true scientist do a review from afar knowing the author has already told him he would not be able to understand all the details without explanation....

No, I would not.
If a "scientist" comes across a theory or a fact, that is unknown to the rest of the world, I would expect him to make all the data pertaining to that finding available to the scientific community in its entirety, and in such a form, that it would be reasonable to expect that the members of that community will comprehend.

If he (that scientist) is unable or unwilling to do the above, I would not be inclined to give any credibility to his alleged findings, or pay any attention to his purported theory. And I would definitely not expect other scientists get in line to meet the guy personally in hopes to find some sanity in his works.

Quote:

ie, would you want that true scientists findings to be based on an incomplete review?

No, I would not. I would want the data freely and completely available.

Quote:

Or would you want as accurate and balls-on a review/report as humanly possibly in a situation such as this? So to you, which is the far more efficient, accurate method of doing the review: over the internet or IN PERSON!? Duh.

Definitely, definitely over the internet.
Once the data is made available on the internet, and ME (and others) had ample opportunity to review and analyze it - then, a possibility of a personal meeting can be discussed, if there are still open questions.

Quote:

It appears your description of MathE jumping through hoops doesn't fit well with his proclamation that he would meet with singer if his expenses were paid. Exactly how would you, as MathE's apologist, expect singer to do that if MathE doesn't want to contact him and ask?

I am not ME's (or anyone else's) "apologist".
I have no idea how he would do it. It is not my problem. And it is not ME's problem either.
If Singer wants his data reviews, he has to arrange that, and do whatever is necessary for that to happen. It is not hard to do. He can email Wizard, and ask him to let him back on the forum (Wizard did not ban him forever, he resigned on his own, and Wizard did say, that he would let him back in if he changes his mind). He can email ME.
He can ask you (or, more likely, you can pretend that he asked you) to handle the communications. He can post his data on a different forum. Etc.
There are plenty of ways to do it, if he only really wanted the review to happen.

Quote:

Perhaps that's the reason why he's not liked, and that only solidifies the points he tried to get across in his proposal.

The reason he is not liked is his annoying, "in-your-face" way to promote his ridiculous claims of global conspiracy.

Wow, 4 more pages of this hoopla since I checked this morning. And no progress, just as I predicted. Jerry Singer must need a new pair of tap shoes, though, the way he's been furiously dancing around every logical challenge. His fingers need a rest from all the manic typing, too..

Quote: weaselman

Perhaps, because it is more trouble than he volunteered for? Because statistical analysis of billions of rows of data is likely to take time and resources that are way beyond what is reasonable for a personal meeting?

It certainly would be nice for him to answer this honestly instead of continuing to read opinions from a few apologists.

I don't quite understand what you mean by NUMBERS "in a foreign language", but in any event, if some of the necessary information is in foreign language is will need to be translated (by Singer), so this point is irrelevant to the question of how the data is delivered - it will have to not be in the foreign language (whatever that means) in either case.

Apparently, your claim that you can read well doesn't hold water. Here's what was in the proposal ON PAGE #1!: "but it is not as simple as it may seem to incorporate all that into something someone unfamiliar with this particular equipment, and in some cases the German language, can comprehend." Does that sound like NUMBERS to you?

If he cannot understand the data, there is no point in him reviewing it.

Finally you discover America! If he cannot understand some of the data, THAT'S WHY MR. SINGER WANTS TO BE THERE!! Yipee!

If a "scientist" comes across a theory or a fact, that is unknown to the rest of the world, I would expect him to make all the data pertaining to that finding available to the scientific community in its entirety, and in such a form, that it would be reasonable to expect that the members of that community will comprehend.

And that's exactly what I see is in Mr. singer's proposal. BINGO! There is no better way to review such data than with the author present for clafification, questions, and translation if need be.

If he (that scientist) is unable or unwilling to do the above, I would not be inclined to give any credibility to his alleged findings, or pay any attention to his purported theory. And I would definitely not expect other scientists get in line to meet the guy personally in hopes to find some sanity in his works.

Of course you wouldn't be inclined, and neither would anybody else. Which is EXACTLY why Mr. singer appears to have made this proposal in the first place!

Definitely, definitely over the internet.
Once the data is made available on the internet, and ME (and others) had ample opportunity to review and analyze it - then, a possibility of a personal meeting can be discussed, if there are still open questions.

I get the feeling if Mr. singer said he'd make the data, in all it's partially incomprehensible glory, available on the internet, you same people would come on and complain that "This is incomplete and therefore useless. WHY didn't he offer to present this to us in person so we could ask him some questions on key points?" Why? Because singer obviously irritates you with his straightforward method of making proposals to prove his points.

If Singer wants his data reviews, he has to arrange that, and do whatever is necessary for that to happen. It is not hard to do. He can email Wizard, and ask him to let him back on the forum (Wizard did not ban him forever, he resigned on his own, and Wizard did say, that he would let him back in if he changes his mind). He can email ME.
He can ask you (or, more likely, you can pretend that he asked you) to handle the communications. He can post his data on a different forum. Etc.
There are plenty of ways to do it, if he only really wanted the review to happen.

Now there's an apologist for you! Mr. singer left his e-mail addresses apparently expecting MathE to work something out with him to get this accomplished, yet he's simply afraid to meet with him. You don't like it but that's obvious. And since singer already said he's not peeking at anything (likely because he expected the groaning and excuse-making) then why wouldn't someone contact HIM to get this done? I see it as too much hiding and too little courage.

The reason he is not liked is his annoying, "in-your-face" way to promote his ridiculous claims of global conspiracy.

And you forgot, it annoys people that he offerred to prove he can win. In front of them..."in-your-face" style if you will. We see how that one worked out too.

I see someone skipped his lessons on the quote command...

Quote: Nareed

1) Ignore the shill until he gets bored and goes away

2) beg the Wizard to invoke the nuclear option

I'd hate to see the nuclear option overused even once, so I vote for the first choice.

I vote 3. Rob Singer's method (and name as far as I'm concerned) banned from further discussion, unless an actual test ever occurs.

Then ya'll can discuss it. And all the usual RS trolls can chime in.

Just what everyone seems to want, but nobody's can help reading: My last post on this issue.

When people start calling someone names, send me uncouth PM's, or start in with the grammar lessons, that's when I know I make annoying sense to them. And when the principal recipient of Mr. singer's post resorts to ignoring how he isn't able to be here to respond while ignoring his request to communicate with him via e-mail in order to come up with the best way to get the data reviewed, it only shows a fear that he tries so hard to cover up but can't. I for one wish he would have the courage to contact singer to resolve this.

When Mr. singer began this thread it sure appears that he wanted something to come of it. I mean it's not like he doesn't know WoV or vice-versa and asked him out of thin air to work for him on this endeavor. That's the part that endeared me to do what I could to see this actually happen. Some people here have claimed singer's a charlatan, a fraud and so on. Easy to say those things if you don't have to bet or face him, right? Even easier when you can continue to sit at your desk and call him ignorant names when you yourself are hiding from HIM.

I've been on forums for 5 years or so, and I've never seen such a comprehensive challenge. And to see it put up on a forum such as this run by a personality such as WoV whom the poster knows, is authentic enough for me. But sadly, no one will take him up on the vp challenges, and MathE has in my opinion shown how he's the world's most prolific ditherer. Not to take anything away from his purported qualifications or abilities, but I just think he could have done something much more convincing to make the review and debate happen. Why he is shying away from doing what he says he loves to do, is surely a mystery to me. How difficult is it to meet with the guy, review the data with 100% certainty that everything presented will be understood the same by both sides, possibly make a short vacation to LV out of it and possibly at the expense of Mr. singer (but we'll never know that either because MathE won't even ask him while making believe singer will read his mind and contact him) and then have a debate over the facts?

Makes no sense. But look at the views, over 3000 of them, and that other thread I see with singer's name in it is in the top ten of all time. To me that says something, and after being involved in this thread I can see that the guy intrigues almost everyone to the point where they just can't ignore what he's saying or proposing. I'll bet if there were an anonymous vote, you'd see an overwhelming majority of people wanting to see MathE meet with him to review his data in person.

Quote: JL2

But look at the views, over 3000 of them, and that other thread I see with singer's name in it is in the top ten of all time. To me that says something, and after being involved in this thread I can see that the guy intrigues almost everyone to the point where they just can't ignore what he's saying or proposing.

That's all he's after. Attention.

(I'd delete that top thread too for good measure, so we don't have to look at his name, hah)

Quote: JL2

When people start calling someone names, send me uncouth PM's, or start in with the grammar lessons,

I don't believe anyone's sending you PMs. Can you prove it?

Quote: JL2

I'll bet if there were an anonymous vote, you'd see an overwhelming majority of people wanting to see MathE meet with him to review his data in person.

I'll bet if there were an anonymous vote, you'd see an overwhelming majority of people wanting to see Mr. Singer publish his data without any preconditions whatsoever.

Fortunately, this forum has an anonymous poll feature. Go ahead and use it.

Quote: JL2

I
Apparently, your claim that you can read well doesn't hold water.

No idea what you are talking about. I have never made any claim like that.

Quote:

Here's what was in the proposal ON PAGE #1!: "but it is not as simple as it may seem to incorporate all that into something someone unfamiliar with this particular equipment, and in some cases the German language, can comprehend." Does that sound like NUMBERS to you?

The poker hands are sequences of numbers (or letters - doesn't matter). He claims to have records of some two billion hands. Those are the numbers I am referring to. He needs to provide that data.
If there is some narrative in German, that is necessary to accompany that data, he will have to translate it into English anyhow (regardless of the method by which the data is provided), so that is a non-issue.

Quote:

Quote:

If he cannot understand the data, there is no point in him reviewing it.

Finally you discover America! If he cannot understand some of the data, THAT'S WHY MR. SINGER WANTS TO BE THERE!! Yipee!

That's not what I said. I said, that if he cannot understand the data, there is no point in him reviewing it, with or without Singer watching over his shoulder, it doesn't matter.

Quote:

Andd that's exactly what I see is in Mr. singer's proposal. BINGO! There is no better way to review such data than with the author present for clafification, questions, and translation if need be.

Yeah, actually there is. A better way is - Singer provides the data, and everyone interested and capable reviews it in any way they like.

Quote:

Of course you wouldn't be inclined, and neither would anybody else. Which is EXACTLY why Mr. singer appears to have made this proposal in the first place!

"Exactly" because nobody would be inclined to accept it? Yes, I think so too.
As you would say - BINGO! :)

Quote:

I get the feeling if Mr. singer said he'd make the data, in all it's partially incomprehensible glory, available on the internet, you same people would come on and complain that "This is incomplete and therefore useless. WHY didn't he offer to present this to us in person so we could ask him some questions on key points?"

No, but, if it indeed was incomprehensible, we would probably say something like "this is incomprehensible, he needs to clean it up and format it properly if he wants anyone to look at it" ...

Quote:

Why? Because singer obviously irritates you with his straightforward method of making proposals to prove his points.

No. Because it would be incomprehensible.

Quote:

Now there's an apologist for you! Mr. singer left his e-mail addresses apparently expecting MathE to work something out with him to get this accomplished, yet he's simply afraid to meet with him.

Stop making circles. What ME is or is not afraid of is irrelevant. If Singer wants his data reviewed, Singer needs to make his data available in a way ME (or whoever else, who agrees to review it) finds acceptable. It is his problem, not ME's.

Quote:

And since singer already said he's not peeking at anything (likely because he expected the groaning and excuse-making) then why wouldn't someone contact HIM to get this done?

Because it is something that he needs. He needs his data reviewed, it is up to him to contact whoever he deems necessary to get it done.

Quote:

And you forgot, it annoys people that he offerred to prove he can win. In front of them..."in-your-face" style if you will. We see how that one worked out too.

No, what annoys people is that he keeps offering that over and over, everywhere, again and again, despite having been told numerous times that nobody actually disputes what he is offering to prove.

Quote: MathExtremist

Fortunately, this forum has an anonymous poll feature. Go ahead and use it.

He wouldn't dare.

I nearly posted a very nasty poll in the Free Speech Zone, but then decided I'd leave the dirty work to someone else for a change.

Has Singer ever posted any large samples of this data? What's the excuse for not doing that? I can scan quite a bit in just one evening. If it's not on some sort of machine copy paper he must have massive handwriting skills -- so posting it shouldn't be a problem either way.

The Wizard has openly invited RS to work out details of the challenge with him via email. Since it hasn't happened yet, I'm going to claim that RS is 'ducking and hiding' from him, and a coward.

Quote: gog

The Wizard has openly invited RS to work out details of the challenge with him via email. Since it hasn't happened yet, I'm going to claim that RS is 'ducking and hiding' from him, and a coward.

I would not call that "cowardliness". He would be a "coward" if he thought he had a chance, but was afraid it would not go his way. But I have no doubt he knows full well that mathematically his "theories" is just a load of crap, and there is no way in hell anyone who had just a hint of a clue would buy any of it after seeing his "evidence".
Ducking the questions and challenges is not therefore cowardly on his part, the proper name for it is fraud.

Quote: gog

The Wizard has openly invited RS to work out details of the challenge with him via email. Since it hasn't happened yet, I'm going to claim that RS is 'ducking and hiding' from him, and a coward.

Brilliant. The only problem is The Proposal & Challenge was made to MathE, not the WoV, who was asked to be a paid administrator in fact.

Here's what WoV posted in this thread that's got you all gaga: "Personally, I will accept the challenge if it is based strictly on the ratio of getting the same suit on the replacement card. If said Ratio is outside of statistical norms, which will be clearly stated in advance, Rob will win. I will let Rob choose any machine he likes in Clark County. So he can scour all the casinos he wishes to find one that cheats, tell me the casino and machine number, and I'll accept the challenge."

However, I do not see that this has anything to do with the proposal at hand, which to my capable eye refers to the machine that was already tested so a review of the resulting details could be made. Whether Mr. singer accepts THIS CHALLENGE is neither here nor there as far as his proposal goes. It does look interesting and who knows if he'll accept it, but I don't believe he lives in Nevada so can he really be expected to scour machines in Clark county? Plus there's the problem of singer not being here to see it or this, and I didn't see where WoV said he e-mailed it to him, did you?