Speedcount
- Thread starter gunslinger
- Start date
McGarvey is so smart
If only we were all so brilliant as you McGarvey. If only Dan would listen to the great McGarvey. Then suddenly you to compare him with Jerry Paterson? got a little ego problem do you Rob?
I especially like the way you can read minds to know that I am a shill. Because I haven't posted before? That is your evidence? What an idiot. You know knothing and make wild guesses about my intentions based on your paranoid thinking.
If only we were all so brilliant as you McGarvey. If only Dan would listen to the great McGarvey. Then suddenly you to compare him with Jerry Paterson? got a little ego problem do you Rob?
I especially like the way you can read minds to know that I am a shill. Because I haven't posted before? That is your evidence? What an idiot. You know knothing and make wild guesses about my intentions based on your paranoid thinking.
Still squeezing
> I understand your points but why does a higher variance make you a loser? You
> just need a bigger bankroll right?
Yes, or keep the same bankroll and play with smaller units. Smaller units means less profit.
A bigger bankroll will help to protect you from ROR, but there is more to it than that. Don't forget about the long run. Larger variance means that it will take much longer to reach the long run. If you don't ever reach the long run you cannot expect to be ahead of the game.
> And 70% of hi-lo is still positive. You just need to play a little more. What
> am I missing?
Yes, you will need to play longer and sustain larger fluctuations. The main barriers for blackjack players are time and money. We want to hit the long run as soon as possible and experience the smallest fluctuations that we can. Smaller variance means that we can play with larger units. Larger units means that will will win more money for the same amount of time. More Money + equal Time + quicker Long Run = happy Advantage Players!
We also don't want to spend all day in casinos just to win a few units. Card counting alone gives a very slim advantage already. Anything smaller would not be worth most player's time. Of course, this decision is subjective. Some people will be very happy to win a few bucks while on vacation. For me, I want to earn at least enough to cover my expenses. This means I must keep a reasonable hourly wage.
> The only rebuttal there is to dispute the sims.
I would love to see them.
> You obviously do not have to accept it. I know it looks suspicious when they
> do not release it to the general public. But that is what they chose to do.
> It does not make it wrong.
You're right, it doesn't. They can do whatever they want with their system, but I think it is wrong to charge that much money for something that will not benefit people very much and most people will discard once they learn how obsolete it is.
I own a typewriter from 1977, but I wouldn't try to sell it for $800. I certainly wouldn't claim that it was a marvelous new invention.
> For the record, I am still a skeptic and do not intend to bet the house on
> this system. I am learning other methods and intend to play them accordingly.
Great. We look forward to hearing from you again when you choose a new system. This has really been a trial-by-fire for you. We've all given you a hard time, but I think you understand why.
-Sonny-
> I understand your points but why does a higher variance make you a loser? You
> just need a bigger bankroll right?
Yes, or keep the same bankroll and play with smaller units. Smaller units means less profit.
A bigger bankroll will help to protect you from ROR, but there is more to it than that. Don't forget about the long run. Larger variance means that it will take much longer to reach the long run. If you don't ever reach the long run you cannot expect to be ahead of the game.
> And 70% of hi-lo is still positive. You just need to play a little more. What
> am I missing?
Yes, you will need to play longer and sustain larger fluctuations. The main barriers for blackjack players are time and money. We want to hit the long run as soon as possible and experience the smallest fluctuations that we can. Smaller variance means that we can play with larger units. Larger units means that will will win more money for the same amount of time. More Money + equal Time + quicker Long Run = happy Advantage Players!
We also don't want to spend all day in casinos just to win a few units. Card counting alone gives a very slim advantage already. Anything smaller would not be worth most player's time. Of course, this decision is subjective. Some people will be very happy to win a few bucks while on vacation. For me, I want to earn at least enough to cover my expenses. This means I must keep a reasonable hourly wage.
> The only rebuttal there is to dispute the sims.
I would love to see them.
> You obviously do not have to accept it. I know it looks suspicious when they
> do not release it to the general public. But that is what they chose to do.
> It does not make it wrong.
You're right, it doesn't. They can do whatever they want with their system, but I think it is wrong to charge that much money for something that will not benefit people very much and most people will discard once they learn how obsolete it is.
I own a typewriter from 1977, but I wouldn't try to sell it for $800. I certainly wouldn't claim that it was a marvelous new invention.
> For the record, I am still a skeptic and do not intend to bet the house on
> this system. I am learning other methods and intend to play them accordingly.
Great. We look forward to hearing from you again when you choose a new system. This has really been a trial-by-fire for you. We've all given you a hard time, but I think you understand why.
-Sonny-
Mickey isn't as smart.
Notice newbie want-to-be counter that didn't know that an $800 watered down counting system seminar wasn't a good deal, all of sudden is throwing around Jerry Paterson's name. Hmmmm... seems to know about the counting scene from 20 years ago. Maybe Mickey knows more than he is letting on.
Mickey The Shill posts should just be deleted along with this entire thread.
Notice newbie want-to-be counter that didn't know that an $800 watered down counting system seminar wasn't a good deal, all of sudden is throwing around Jerry Paterson's name. Hmmmm... seems to know about the counting scene from 20 years ago. Maybe Mickey knows more than he is letting on.
Mickey The Shill posts should just be deleted along with this entire thread.
Patterson?
I did not throw out his name. McGarvey did when he said that Dan Provost was going the way of Jerry Patterson.
Anyway who cares. You have all convinced yourself that Speedcount is bogus with the only reasoning being the price of the seminar. Seems like faulty logic to me.
I wonder however, when people use bad plays and other techniques to disguise their play, aren't they also giving up performance? Do they not bring down their advantage also? What about mistakes that you don't even know you are making? I supposed a long time counter would not make mistakes but the average counter would, wouldn't they? How then would you feel during a losing streak? Can you comfortably attribute it to variance or do you start to wonder if you are really playing with an advantage.
I have read that some poeple think there are very few (in the 100's) proficient card counters actually playing. Why is that?
You all think I am a shill. Go ahead and think what you want. I am not. I never once in my posts promoted that class. I just said as mich as I could about what I know. And I did not start this post.
Dan Provost and Henry Tamburin are not hypsters. I think many people agree with that. I know some think that Mr. Scoblete is, but he is marketing the product, he is not the developer.
Overpricing a product does not disqualify its performance. It is what it is. I believe the jury is still out and it may yet be disproven at some time in the future.
If people really want to know they could pool their money, take the class and do their own sims. I do not have this capability and even if I did, you would not believe my results anyway.
Was KO immediately accepted when it first came out?
Also, is KO just for beginners or could it be used full time in a shoe game?
I did not throw out his name. McGarvey did when he said that Dan Provost was going the way of Jerry Patterson.
Anyway who cares. You have all convinced yourself that Speedcount is bogus with the only reasoning being the price of the seminar. Seems like faulty logic to me.
I wonder however, when people use bad plays and other techniques to disguise their play, aren't they also giving up performance? Do they not bring down their advantage also? What about mistakes that you don't even know you are making? I supposed a long time counter would not make mistakes but the average counter would, wouldn't they? How then would you feel during a losing streak? Can you comfortably attribute it to variance or do you start to wonder if you are really playing with an advantage.
I have read that some poeple think there are very few (in the 100's) proficient card counters actually playing. Why is that?
You all think I am a shill. Go ahead and think what you want. I am not. I never once in my posts promoted that class. I just said as mich as I could about what I know. And I did not start this post.
Dan Provost and Henry Tamburin are not hypsters. I think many people agree with that. I know some think that Mr. Scoblete is, but he is marketing the product, he is not the developer.
Overpricing a product does not disqualify its performance. It is what it is. I believe the jury is still out and it may yet be disproven at some time in the future.
If people really want to know they could pool their money, take the class and do their own sims. I do not have this capability and even if I did, you would not believe my results anyway.
Was KO immediately accepted when it first came out?
Also, is KO just for beginners or could it be used full time in a shoe game?
Same old song and dance
> You have all convinced yourself that Speedcount is bogus with the only
> reasoning being the price of the seminar. Seems like faulty logic to me.
The effectiveness of the system is irrelevant. Charging $900 for something that is widely available for free is a scam. On top of that, they admit that the system is not as powerful as the free systems. How is this not bogus?
> I wonder however, when people use bad plays and other techniques to disguise
> their play, aren't they also giving up performance?
Yes, but they are aware of how much their plays are costing them. They are balancing their bad plays with the higher spreads that it allows them to get away with. Because of this, some mistakes can actually let you earn more money than playing a perfect game!
> I have read that some poeple think there are very few (in the 100's)
> proficient card counters actually playing. Why is that?
Because they learn some cut-rate system that doesn't give them much of an advantage. They also don't practice, learn advanced playing decisions and make mistakes. They don't understand bankroll management, bet sizing and ROR. They don't have the discipline to learn the craft and they don't know how (or where) to find playable games. In short, they are losers to begin with.
> Was KO immediately accepted when it first came out?
No, but the developers went to great lengths to get it accepted. They disclosed all of their simulations and their results. They encouraged others to analyze their system for themselves. It was not accepted until several independent analysis were done.
The developers of the speed count seem unusually hesitant to disclose the specifics of their system. This is a sure signs that they are trying to hide something. In fact, they claim that it cannot be simulated by any of the commercial software. This is a standard line that system sellers use when they know that the math won't back up their claims. When an independent analysis shows how weak their system is, the developers will complain that the software was not accurate. This technique has been used by countless con-artists such as John Patrick, Jerry Patterson and Bobby Singer - and now Frank Scoblete.
You'll have to excuse us if we are a little hard on this system. We have heard it all before.
-Sonny-
> You have all convinced yourself that Speedcount is bogus with the only
> reasoning being the price of the seminar. Seems like faulty logic to me.
The effectiveness of the system is irrelevant. Charging $900 for something that is widely available for free is a scam. On top of that, they admit that the system is not as powerful as the free systems. How is this not bogus?
> I wonder however, when people use bad plays and other techniques to disguise
> their play, aren't they also giving up performance?
Yes, but they are aware of how much their plays are costing them. They are balancing their bad plays with the higher spreads that it allows them to get away with. Because of this, some mistakes can actually let you earn more money than playing a perfect game!
> I have read that some poeple think there are very few (in the 100's)
> proficient card counters actually playing. Why is that?
Because they learn some cut-rate system that doesn't give them much of an advantage. They also don't practice, learn advanced playing decisions and make mistakes. They don't understand bankroll management, bet sizing and ROR. They don't have the discipline to learn the craft and they don't know how (or where) to find playable games. In short, they are losers to begin with.
> Was KO immediately accepted when it first came out?
No, but the developers went to great lengths to get it accepted. They disclosed all of their simulations and their results. They encouraged others to analyze their system for themselves. It was not accepted until several independent analysis were done.
The developers of the speed count seem unusually hesitant to disclose the specifics of their system. This is a sure signs that they are trying to hide something. In fact, they claim that it cannot be simulated by any of the commercial software. This is a standard line that system sellers use when they know that the math won't back up their claims. When an independent analysis shows how weak their system is, the developers will complain that the software was not accurate. This technique has been used by countless con-artists such as John Patrick, Jerry Patterson and Bobby Singer - and now Frank Scoblete.
You'll have to excuse us if we are a little hard on this system. We have heard it all before.
-Sonny-
But it is not hard
so as to exclude all but a few hundred is it? Can anybody tell me why so few people can master this? I have now looked at KO and Hi-Lo and it really does not look too hard. What is the toughest part? Playing well? Not getting caught? Assuming bankroll is not a problem, why couln't a person with above average intelligence make some very good money at card counting? Is the game now so bad as too make it not worth the effort?
so as to exclude all but a few hundred is it? Can anybody tell me why so few people can master this? I have now looked at KO and Hi-Lo and it really does not look too hard. What is the toughest part? Playing well? Not getting caught? Assuming bankroll is not a problem, why couln't a person with above average intelligence make some very good money at card counting? Is the game now so bad as too make it not worth the effort?
Why Few Are Able To Do It
why few do it:
1 - counting is work and a grind -- People want easy money, not to work for it.
2 - counting requires discipline -- an ever faster vanishing character trait. I want mine now, quicker. Instant results rule!
3 - casinos have lots of traps -- many a counter has become degenerate gambler or worse, if not careful.
4 - counting requires a large bankroll -- it is not hard to find better things to do with all that money
5 - the games get worse, the casino detection gets better -- you are chasing harder and harder after a smaller chunk of cheese.
6 - if you are smart enough, disciplined enough, skilled enough, and funded well enough to do all of the above, it is almost certain you have the smarts, discipline, skills, and funds to make a lot more money at something else more legitimate and less risky.
PS >> I was looking at some facts about the Speed Count. It seems that when they compare it to HiLo, they are talking about only using HiLo just for betting. An indexless HiLo, with no playing variations. Varying your strategy according to the count with HiLo counts for about 20% of your profits.
I have also heard that they do not use optimal betting ramps with their sims. But don't really have the facts on this, but suspect it is true -- Appears the Speed Count overbets your true advantage at times, which increases risk.
Also, the games they are talking about are pretty generic rules, average to poor penetration, shoe games. With bad to average games like this, a very sophisticated 3 level count like AOII is going to perform pretty close to a simple 1 level count like KO.
So if you play bad games, don't bet properly, and just use basic strategy --- THEN YES! The Speed Count will perform almost as well as HiLo (or HiOptII, or AOII, or Halves, or even computer perfect play).
why few do it:
1 - counting is work and a grind -- People want easy money, not to work for it.
2 - counting requires discipline -- an ever faster vanishing character trait. I want mine now, quicker. Instant results rule!
3 - casinos have lots of traps -- many a counter has become degenerate gambler or worse, if not careful.
4 - counting requires a large bankroll -- it is not hard to find better things to do with all that money
5 - the games get worse, the casino detection gets better -- you are chasing harder and harder after a smaller chunk of cheese.
6 - if you are smart enough, disciplined enough, skilled enough, and funded well enough to do all of the above, it is almost certain you have the smarts, discipline, skills, and funds to make a lot more money at something else more legitimate and less risky.
PS >> I was looking at some facts about the Speed Count. It seems that when they compare it to HiLo, they are talking about only using HiLo just for betting. An indexless HiLo, with no playing variations. Varying your strategy according to the count with HiLo counts for about 20% of your profits.
I have also heard that they do not use optimal betting ramps with their sims. But don't really have the facts on this, but suspect it is true -- Appears the Speed Count overbets your true advantage at times, which increases risk.
Also, the games they are talking about are pretty generic rules, average to poor penetration, shoe games. With bad to average games like this, a very sophisticated 3 level count like AOII is going to perform pretty close to a simple 1 level count like KO.
So if you play bad games, don't bet properly, and just use basic strategy --- THEN YES! The Speed Count will perform almost as well as HiLo (or HiOptII, or AOII, or Halves, or even computer perfect play).
Thank you
I appreciate your post. It does seem that there is a SMALL advantage to be had using Speed Count. Maybe good for the casual player that understands bankroll requirements and is tired of losing. I know that I never won at blackjack without using it and I am winning with it. Maybe lucky I don't know. But even in the short run I always lost before. Other count systems clearly are better if you wok at it.
your first couple of points baffle me in a way. you say
>>why few do it:
>>1 - counting is work and a grind -- People want easy money, not to work for it.
>>2 - counting requires discipline -- an ever faster vanishing character trait. I want mine now, quicker. Instant results rule!
Getting a degree is hard work and a grind. People do it. Working as, say an engineer, is requires discipline and is a grind. People do it. Counting is nowhere near as hard as this. What gives?
other comments on your thoughts
>>3 - casinos have lots of traps -- many a counter has become degenerate gambler or worse, if not careful.
Agreed!! I see that all the time.
>>4 - counting requires a large bankroll -- it is not hard to find better things to do with all that money
Agreed. But this seems to be a matter of education. Cleary more than a few hundred can do that!
>>5 - the games get worse, the casino detection gets better -- you are chasing harder and harder after a smaller chunk of cheese.
Probably hard to make small money but hard to make a lot.
>>6 - if you are smart enough, disciplined enough, skilled enough, and funded well enough to do all of the above, it is almost certain you have the smarts, discipline, skills, and funds to make a lot more money at something else more legitimate and less risky.
Good point. If you can make more money with less risk, why not.
>>PS >> I was looking at some facts about the Speed Count. It seems that when they compare it to HiLo, they are talking about only using HiLo just for betting. An indexless HiLo, with no playing variations. Varying your strategy according to the count with HiLo counts for about 20% of your profits.
probably true for Hi-Lo, but I have read that most of KO's strength comes from betting, not playing indexes. True or not? And if we say the KO and Hi-Lo are similar in results (can we say that?) then could we make the comparison with KO?
>>I have also heard that they do not use optimal betting ramps with their sims. But don't really have the facts on this, but suspect it is true -- Appears the Speed Count overbets your true advantage at times, which increases risk.
Assuming the sims are not flawed (probably a bad assumption), the counts that they are increasing bets into all show positive expectation. Whereas KO has you increasing bets sometimes into negative expectation. Is this true (on KO)?
>>Also, the games they are talking about are pretty generic rules, average to poor penetration, shoe games. With bad to average games like this, a very sophisticated 3 level count like AOII is going to perform pretty close to a simple 1 level count like KO.
Good point.
>>So if you play bad games, don't bet properly, and just use basic strategy --- THEN YES! The Speed Count will perform almost as well as HiLo (or HiOptII, or AOII, or Halves, or even computer perfect play).
Again at least you are playing to an advantage. Better than negative. Not the best you can get, but for the casual player, what the heck.
So it seems SC is not for people on this this board but is for another market entirely. Whether it is ethical for them to charge what they charge is for the customer to decide. If they hype it to get people in, well, that's marketing. Once you're in, you get what it is regardless of the hype.
I appeciate your input.
I appreciate your post. It does seem that there is a SMALL advantage to be had using Speed Count. Maybe good for the casual player that understands bankroll requirements and is tired of losing. I know that I never won at blackjack without using it and I am winning with it. Maybe lucky I don't know. But even in the short run I always lost before. Other count systems clearly are better if you wok at it.
your first couple of points baffle me in a way. you say
>>why few do it:
>>1 - counting is work and a grind -- People want easy money, not to work for it.
>>2 - counting requires discipline -- an ever faster vanishing character trait. I want mine now, quicker. Instant results rule!
Getting a degree is hard work and a grind. People do it. Working as, say an engineer, is requires discipline and is a grind. People do it. Counting is nowhere near as hard as this. What gives?
other comments on your thoughts
>>3 - casinos have lots of traps -- many a counter has become degenerate gambler or worse, if not careful.
Agreed!! I see that all the time.
>>4 - counting requires a large bankroll -- it is not hard to find better things to do with all that money
Agreed. But this seems to be a matter of education. Cleary more than a few hundred can do that!
>>5 - the games get worse, the casino detection gets better -- you are chasing harder and harder after a smaller chunk of cheese.
Probably hard to make small money but hard to make a lot.
>>6 - if you are smart enough, disciplined enough, skilled enough, and funded well enough to do all of the above, it is almost certain you have the smarts, discipline, skills, and funds to make a lot more money at something else more legitimate and less risky.
Good point. If you can make more money with less risk, why not.
>>PS >> I was looking at some facts about the Speed Count. It seems that when they compare it to HiLo, they are talking about only using HiLo just for betting. An indexless HiLo, with no playing variations. Varying your strategy according to the count with HiLo counts for about 20% of your profits.
probably true for Hi-Lo, but I have read that most of KO's strength comes from betting, not playing indexes. True or not? And if we say the KO and Hi-Lo are similar in results (can we say that?) then could we make the comparison with KO?
>>I have also heard that they do not use optimal betting ramps with their sims. But don't really have the facts on this, but suspect it is true -- Appears the Speed Count overbets your true advantage at times, which increases risk.
Assuming the sims are not flawed (probably a bad assumption), the counts that they are increasing bets into all show positive expectation. Whereas KO has you increasing bets sometimes into negative expectation. Is this true (on KO)?
>>Also, the games they are talking about are pretty generic rules, average to poor penetration, shoe games. With bad to average games like this, a very sophisticated 3 level count like AOII is going to perform pretty close to a simple 1 level count like KO.
Good point.
>>So if you play bad games, don't bet properly, and just use basic strategy --- THEN YES! The Speed Count will perform almost as well as HiLo (or HiOptII, or AOII, or Halves, or even computer perfect play).
Again at least you are playing to an advantage. Better than negative. Not the best you can get, but for the casual player, what the heck.
So it seems SC is not for people on this this board but is for another market entirely. Whether it is ethical for them to charge what they charge is for the customer to decide. If they hype it to get people in, well, that's marketing. Once you're in, you get what it is regardless of the hype.
I appeciate your input.
The variance
is deadly. I think this is the reason so few do it. You can go days, weeks losing. People hit a bad stretch and they quit, and who can blame? You lose confidence you are doing it right and wonder why you bother.
Also if you play green chips maybe you average $25 per hour. Count full time that is $50,000 per year. You can do better at something else or you would not have bankroll to play green anyway.
Most who do it do it for the sport. This is smart. To make a living at it is too hard.
is deadly. I think this is the reason so few do it. You can go days, weeks losing. People hit a bad stretch and they quit, and who can blame? You lose confidence you are doing it right and wonder why you bother.
Also if you play green chips maybe you average $25 per hour. Count full time that is $50,000 per year. You can do better at something else or you would not have bankroll to play green anyway.
Most who do it do it for the sport. This is smart. To make a living at it is too hard.