My 3-day Ban: An Open Letter
- Thread starter zengrifter
- Start date
Here's another -
-------------------------
Subject : ...Zengrifter working the small con
posted by Fake_Handle on 05-07-2007 12:56
EXCERPTED
....it's ignorant and idiotic to prefer the presence of a con man, who is on a web site specifically to recruit new victims, to the presence of someone [STALKER] who is telling the truth about the con man but uses "potty-mouth" words. What you're saying is that it's fine for Ken Smith to support the rape of newbies at his web site, as long as the rapist uses pretty words.
.
And regarding Zengrifter betting red chips, it was not because of a bet spread. He was betting red chips on games where any real pro would have been betting table max, and the reason he was betting red chips is because 1) he isn't really very skillful, and 2) he doesn't have any money. And the reason he doesn't have any money is because instead of building a real professional gambling career, which takes work and discipline, he relies on the small con--ripping newbies off for $5-$10k whenever he runs a little short.
.
The guy wasn't even smart enough to pull off the big con.
--------------------
I have it on good information that Fake_Handle is the same poster as Radar O'Reily, the previous poster, and one of the owners of the Fight Club where several of us have been banned from offering counter punches. zgSubject : ...Zengrifter working the small con
posted by Fake_Handle on 05-07-2007 12:56
EXCERPTED
....it's ignorant and idiotic to prefer the presence of a con man, who is on a web site specifically to recruit new victims, to the presence of someone [STALKER] who is telling the truth about the con man but uses "potty-mouth" words. What you're saying is that it's fine for Ken Smith to support the rape of newbies at his web site, as long as the rapist uses pretty words.
.
And regarding Zengrifter betting red chips, it was not because of a bet spread. He was betting red chips on games where any real pro would have been betting table max, and the reason he was betting red chips is because 1) he isn't really very skillful, and 2) he doesn't have any money. And the reason he doesn't have any money is because instead of building a real professional gambling career, which takes work and discipline, he relies on the small con--ripping newbies off for $5-$10k whenever he runs a little short.
.
The guy wasn't even smart enough to pull off the big con.
--------------------
Last edited:
Now let's get this straight- you get a 10% edge holecarding but you spend only 10% of your working time playing. Multiplied out that sounds an awful lot like 1% advantage per unit time to me. Meanwhile I'm getting 1.2% counting a good game with a good spread, 100% of the time. And I don't need a BP and can play shoe as well as pitch. Holecarding doesn't sound like a very good deal.
Think average bet size. With a bigger edge, you can bet a larger fraction of your bankroll. So, one hour of hole-carding at a 10% edge is better than 10 hours counting at a 1% (or 1.2%, if you want), because you're getting 10% of a much larger average bet size. You can't count and sit there at 2 x table max all the time. Seriously, think about these things a little before you post something like you just did. And that's just something like hole-carding. You can do even better with other techniques in terms of edge and hands per hour.
You're right, and I can't put out 10 X my average bet on any more than a handful of pitch games in the US without getting hawked and then trespassed. Most such games are heavily protected, employ the strongest dealers, thus you can't sit and play 2 x table max all the time there either.
Then there is variance. You are putting more money on the table with proper holecard strategy, then there is the risk that you will not see the holecard on any particular round. You cannot put out 10% of your BR on an expected 10% advantage in a blackjack game, particularly when you are doubling 5's and splitting 10's all the time.
There is no legal technique that can give you more advantage and hands per hour at that advantage than holecarding. Nextcarding can give you a higher advantage but those dealers are even rarer and less stable in their rate of exposure than holecarders. Unless you are talking about forcing dealer errors, but that doesn't work long enough to provide a sustainabe advantage.
Then there is variance. You are putting more money on the table with proper holecard strategy, then there is the risk that you will not see the holecard on any particular round. You cannot put out 10% of your BR on an expected 10% advantage in a blackjack game, particularly when you are doubling 5's and splitting 10's all the time.
There is no legal technique that can give you more advantage and hands per hour at that advantage than holecarding. Nextcarding can give you a higher advantage but those dealers are even rarer and less stable in their rate of exposure than holecarders. Unless you are talking about forcing dealer errors, but that doesn't work long enough to provide a sustainabe advantage.
Sonny said:
But what if there was a legal technique that let you do both? 
-Sonny-
-Sonny-
(Did I guess the technique?)
zengrifter said:
But now I'm a "clueless neophyte-charlatan who makes a living ripping off newbies and hawking worthless books and software"!
"Huh, I tell ya, I get no respect! Its not easy being me!" zg
.........ZEN DANGERFIELD..................
"Huh, I tell ya, I get no respect! Its not easy being me!" zg
.........ZEN DANGERFIELD..................
EPS