The juice just ain't worth the squeeze
Dude, you have to admit that this all seems incredibly sketchy. Here are a few "gems" I picked up from the website (these are ACTUAL QUOTES!):
"The casinos have never heard of this approach; have no one skilled in catching a user of this approach, and have not created any software or hardware to catch players using it."
Well, the casinos are aware of when they have the edge and when they don't. Standard card counting systems are 95-99% accurate at spotting when to raise your bet. If you are raising your bet when you have the edge they will catch you, case closed.
On the other hand, if your system has you raising your bets when you don't have the edge, you will not be playing a winning game. Which is it? Either way, this system is sub-par.
"Our revolutionary new method is so different, that it can't be modeled in any available software simulators."
Isn't that convenient. Now they are stealing John Patrick's sales pitch!
I'm sorry Mickey, but 15,000 hands isn't going to convince anyone here. We run at least several hundred million (often a few billion) hands before we expect to see accurate results. The variance and standard error of 15,000 hands is simply way too high.
"The math for the speed count is irrefutable. It works, and we'll show you a summary of the math to prove it..."
That sounds great! I can't wait to see it!
"You'll learn proper bet sizing based on your advantage and how to avoid what mathematicians call "risk of ruin""
Wow, it "avoids" risk of ruin too huh? That's a little too much for me to swallow. How can a system with a smaller edge (about 70% according to the author) also give you a smaller ROR? By definition wouldn't the variance be larger and a bigger losing streak more likely? The only way to reduce your ROR would be to use smaller units, which would also reduce your win rate. Not only are you getting less action, you are also keeping less of the action you are getting!
By the way, there is no way to "avoid" ROR there are only ways to decrease it to a manageable degree. There is no way to avoid variance, that's why they call it gambling.
"At the end of these two days, you will have the tools to get a verifiable, proven, mathematical edge over the casinos...you will have all the tools necessary to gain an immediate, verifiable, mathematical edge over the casino."
Still waiting for that "verifiable, proven, irrefutable" summary. Where are the "millions of sims" that Mickey mentioned? Oh wait, I forgot - this revolutionary system can't be simulated.
"Think of it, just $695 to learn a method that will give you a mathematically verifiable edge over the house for years to come; the easiest advantage method ever developed, "
Here's an even simpler system: put your money in a savings account. You can easily get 2% interest, which is better than this system will get. You will be making money much faster than you would if you were playing blackjack with it, so you would therefore be "beating the house" since they will never see a dime from you.
And finally, time for the "irrefutable, mathematically proven" summary they have been promising:
send checks or money orders to:
Frank Scoblete Enterprises, LLC
The bottom line is, this is WAAAAAY too expensive, WAAAAAY too weak and WAAAAAAY to over-hyped. I'm not saying it doesn't give you a small edge over the casinos, I'm just saying that it's not worth the money OR the brainpower. There are much cheaper ways to get much more reliable knowledge. There's no reason that it should cost $700 to get started in card counting, especially when the books are so cheap and websites like this are free.
