Tell you what. I’ll leave it up to others as to whether or not this should be included with the other BJ scams. My evidence that it should:
His basic strategy has many errors. And yet is more difficult than normal BS since it contains CD plays.
He claims that you have an advantage with a strategy that has a PE of .605 with flat betting. (May as well flat bet since the betting correlation at .84 is worse than every system on my site.)
He suggests his advanced system is simply an Ace side count, when in fact it requires multiple balanced counts. You even have to count six cards in multiple counts. (Just for fun, I once simmed the use of Hi-Opt II with multi-parameter tables for playing and RPC for betting at the same time. His strategy is more complex than this.) Oddly, even with four separate counts, he never counts 2’s.
The system is sold via Google ads claiming that it is superior to HiLo and Hi-Opt II. He claims that HiLo and Hi-Opt II are not very good.
He claims that Stanford Wong is irresponsible for not talking about the HiLo correlation of the three plays Aguilar feels are important. Few BJ books bother with such numbers.
He claims that Don Schlesinger used “intuition” only in developing the Illustrious 18, is wrong and Griffin’s book proves this. He goes on to say that Don was biased against some plays because they didn’t correlate well with HiLo “his favorite system.” In fact, Don came up with the Ill18 from calculations from Griffin’s book, collaborated with Griffin, and has never used HiLo.
After the only person to review his strategy (me), at his request, gave a bad review, he called the sims fraudulent. He claimed this fraud was motivated by a desire to make the strategy look worse than systems sold by the reviewer. There are no such systems.
The simple fact is that when his beliefs contradict those of others, he ascribes false motives to them.
The system is sold in the manner of many scams. Everyone else is wrong, everyone else has dishonest motives, only his validation method is correct, believe only the system seller. Nothing is said of EV or win rate. The EV is negative. The only advice on risk is “Sell your car if you have to, but save enough for the bus fare home.” The last part is the best advice he has.
Now does this make it a scam? A scam requires fraud. He probably actually believes you can flat bet and win with a .605 PE and you shouldn't Split 2's and 3s. So that alone does not a scam make. Suggesting the side counting is simply an Ace side count is getting closer to a scam since you don't find out it's impossibly difficult until you pay the money. But, when he requests an independent review and doesn't like it, he invents a tale of fraud and dishonest motives going so far as to invent details of the 'fraud.' If he thought that Don and I were ignorant and dishonest, why did he ask us to review it in the first place?
IMO this makes it a scam.
