The Straw That Broke the Camels Back
- Thread starter Midwest Player
- Start date
Who was the genius that exposed Dummy's handle to be Tthree? Damn im good.
...
Also whoever mentioned 'free speech', i think it was KJ, i hope you and everyone else in society realize free speech only applies with you vs the governmemt. Theres no general free speech rights. If an employer or site manager doesnt want you to say something they have every right to silence you.
...
Also whoever mentioned 'free speech', i think it was KJ, i hope you and everyone else in society realize free speech only applies with you vs the governmemt. Theres no general free speech rights. If an employer or site manager doesnt want you to say something they have every right to silence you.
Last edited:
Lets see BoSox. How many players have you ever heard mention this very specific topic of using the mirrored ceilings to track a table across the pit? 
I can think of two that have mentioned doing this very specific thing. Both participate here. And as it turns out both of us talking about the exact same location in Atlantic City, many years ago, long before we even knew of each other. But I will say this about it. 1.) I am in good company. and 2.) I would bet there are others that played AC back then that took advantage of this.
This discussion actually came about from a slightly more general discussion of tracking a second table while playing one., a technique I have been employing since moving to Vegas almost a decade ago. And there were also quite a number of very experienced successful players that do this as well. Don Schlesinger told me he has been doing this for 40 years.
I don't think players or members of these forums that laugh at that technique and immediately dismiss it have any idea just how powerful it is. You are able to exit a negative or neutral but not very promising count at one table and immediately jump to a positive count or much more advantageous situation at the next with zero down time. This means you are actually changing the true count frequencies and seeing and playing significantly more positive count situations including "max bet" situations per 100 rounds played. Significant increase in win rate. Much more significant that things like what count, that are often discussed (to death).
Now of course, John eluded to variance, not specific improvement in win rate. I'll let Don or one of the many other guys much smarter than me answer that one. But I'll tell you this much. There is way to much obsession with reducing variance in my opinion. Blackjack card counting is an advantage play with a very small edge and fairly high variance. The way to eliminate worries about variance is to be properly bankrolled.
I can think of two that have mentioned doing this very specific thing. Both participate here. And as it turns out both of us talking about the exact same location in Atlantic City, many years ago, long before we even knew of each other. But I will say this about it. 1.) I am in good company. and 2.) I would bet there are others that played AC back then that took advantage of this. This discussion actually came about from a slightly more general discussion of tracking a second table while playing one., a technique I have been employing since moving to Vegas almost a decade ago. And there were also quite a number of very experienced successful players that do this as well. Don Schlesinger told me he has been doing this for 40 years.
I don't think players or members of these forums that laugh at that technique and immediately dismiss it have any idea just how powerful it is. You are able to exit a negative or neutral but not very promising count at one table and immediately jump to a positive count or much more advantageous situation at the next with zero down time. This means you are actually changing the true count frequencies and seeing and playing significantly more positive count situations including "max bet" situations per 100 rounds played. Significant increase in win rate. Much more significant that things like what count, that are often discussed (to death).
Now of course, John eluded to variance, not specific improvement in win rate. I'll let Don or one of the many other guys much smarter than me answer that one. But I'll tell you this much. There is way to much obsession with reducing variance in my opinion. Blackjack card counting is an advantage play with a very small edge and fairly high variance. The way to eliminate worries about variance is to be properly bankrolled.
KewlJ said:
Lets see BoSox. How many players have you ever heard mention this very specific topic of using the mirrored ceilings to track a table across the pit? I can think of two that have mentioned doing this very specific thing. Both participate here. And as it turns out both of us talking about the exact same location in Atlantic City, many years ago, long before we even knew of each other. But I will say this about it. 1.) I am in good company. and 2.) I would bet there are others that played AC back then that took advantage of this.
This discussion actually came about from a slightly more general discussion of tracking a second table while playing one., a technique I have been employing since moving to Vegas almost a decade ago. And there were also quite a number of very experienced successful players that do this as well. Don Schlesinger told me he has been doing this for 40 years.
I don't think players or members of these forums that laugh at that technique and immediately dismiss it have any idea just how powerful it is. You are able to exit a negative or neutral but not very promising count at one table and immediately jump to a positive count or much more advantageous situation at the next with zero down time. This means you are actually changing the true count frequencies and seeing and playing significantly more positive count situations including "max bet" situations per 100 rounds played. Significant increase in win rate. Much more significant that things like what count, that are often discussed (to death).
Now of course, John eluded to variance, not specific improvement in win rate. I'll let Don or one of the many other guys much smarter than me answer that one. But I'll tell you this much. There is way to much obsession with reducing variance in my opinion. Blackjack card counting is an advantage play with a very small edge and fairly high variance. The way to eliminate worries about variance is to be properly bankrolled.
I can think of two that have mentioned doing this very specific thing. Both participate here. And as it turns out both of us talking about the exact same location in Atlantic City, many years ago, long before we even knew of each other. But I will say this about it. 1.) I am in good company. and 2.) I would bet there are others that played AC back then that took advantage of this. This discussion actually came about from a slightly more general discussion of tracking a second table while playing one., a technique I have been employing since moving to Vegas almost a decade ago. And there were also quite a number of very experienced successful players that do this as well. Don Schlesinger told me he has been doing this for 40 years.
I don't think players or members of these forums that laugh at that technique and immediately dismiss it have any idea just how powerful it is. You are able to exit a negative or neutral but not very promising count at one table and immediately jump to a positive count or much more advantageous situation at the next with zero down time. This means you are actually changing the true count frequencies and seeing and playing significantly more positive count situations including "max bet" situations per 100 rounds played. Significant increase in win rate. Much more significant that things like what count, that are often discussed (to death).
Now of course, John eluded to variance, not specific improvement in win rate. I'll let Don or one of the many other guys much smarter than me answer that one. But I'll tell you this much. There is way to much obsession with reducing variance in my opinion. Blackjack card counting is an advantage play with a very small edge and fairly high variance. The way to eliminate worries about variance is to be properly bankrolled.
Don.
if i may digress a bit regarding some games other than blackjack.
no argument sir. but asking for your opinion far as the scenario below:
the other night, i was about spot on far as EV for my typical daily session. i was happy with that. i’m about to leave for the day, when a play presented on a different game (that has generally half the ev and twice the variance) of the games i’d been playing but it was in it’s ‘highest’ state of advantage. i figured i’d likely lose half of what i’d made (or worse) for the day on the plays if things didn’t go so ‘stellar’, however if things went really well, then i’d leave singing to the bank, sorta thing. i passed the play up, took my EV home with me. i should add that currently the revenue realized has more significance with respect to utility than it normally does.
did i mess up, in your opinion?
no argument sir. but asking for your opinion far as the scenario below:
the other night, i was about spot on far as EV for my typical daily session. i was happy with that. i’m about to leave for the day, when a play presented on a different game (that has generally half the ev and twice the variance) of the games i’d been playing but it was in it’s ‘highest’ state of advantage. i figured i’d likely lose half of what i’d made (or worse) for the day on the plays if things didn’t go so ‘stellar’, however if things went really well, then i’d leave singing to the bank, sorta thing. i passed the play up, took my EV home with me. i should add that currently the revenue realized has more significance with respect to utility than it normally does.
did i mess up, in your opinion?
I dont believe many of the so called 'successful' players on these forums as well as on GWAE. The whole backcounting by using mirrors in the ceiling just adds to the skepticism. So sad that people even consider that a possibility. A lot of what KJ and his stories seem crediblr about winning and losing a lot, but none of that can be verified. Anyone can play anyone on the internet and tell whatever story they want for whatever agenda they want.
The 'successful' stories of Yoshi, Joe, KJ, and whoever else that claims they made hundreds of thousands or millions should all be looked at very carefully because there are a lot of red flags in between if you carefully observe it.
The 'successful' stories of Yoshi, Joe, KJ, and whoever else that claims they made hundreds of thousands or millions should all be looked at very carefully because there are a lot of red flags in between if you carefully observe it.
I have been following KJ's stories across several internet forums for about 15 years now, and they are always consistent. Liars always slip up and eventually make some statement that is inconsistent. The only black mark against KJ that I can recall is when he faked his own death years ago. I believe Ken Smith banned him on this site for a time for doing it. I don't remember how he got caught in this fake death thing, but I do remember there was a big announcement on BJ21 about it similar to when MathProf died. And yeah he pissed off a lot of folks.
Really? We are going to rehash this of all things? Well I'm not. Bosox explained it pretty well. I was trying to protect myself after being robbed. Not my best decision. Not well thought through. I am not proud of it. Some choose to hold it against me. That is their choice.
As for Zenking. I don't know what to say. I have tried to help him with some info and advice both publicly and privately. I even considered letting him stay with us when he first moved to Vegas and was struggling with all sorts of things like finding a safe place to live and bed bugs and all. But the timing just didn't work as I had my heart surgery about that time.
Looking back I am glad I didn't get involved. Zk is far to negative for me. He blames everyone else for just about everything that doesn't work out to his satisfaction, including some off the wall conspiracy theories.
Zk is free to think what he likes. But I will say this again. It doesn't take that much to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking. Zenking, if you have decided that I am just talking, I am adding bad judgement to your list of issues.
As for Zenking. I don't know what to say. I have tried to help him with some info and advice both publicly and privately. I even considered letting him stay with us when he first moved to Vegas and was struggling with all sorts of things like finding a safe place to live and bed bugs and all. But the timing just didn't work as I had my heart surgery about that time.
Looking back I am glad I didn't get involved. Zk is far to negative for me. He blames everyone else for just about everything that doesn't work out to his satisfaction, including some off the wall conspiracy theories.
Zk is free to think what he likes. But I will say this again. It doesn't take that much to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking. Zenking, if you have decided that I am just talking, I am adding bad judgement to your list of issues.
Last edited:
I don't want to attack anyone's character and don't like calling people out; I let the vast majority of things slide. But I do think that if someone blatantly lies... that it shouldn't just be brushed under the rug.
KewlJ stated not long ago regarding "beast mode" on automatic shuffling machines: "I now have the machine in my possession" and "All I can say is that there is a cheating feature built in and we are trusting the casino industry not to use this feature? Ah.... NOT this guy!"
Those types of outrageous claims shouldn't be tolerated.
If it was an honest mistake then I apologize for calling you out but you still should have clarified afterward; claims like that send a lot of people into a frenzy.
KewlJ stated not long ago regarding "beast mode" on automatic shuffling machines: "I now have the machine in my possession" and "All I can say is that there is a cheating feature built in and we are trusting the casino industry not to use this feature? Ah.... NOT this guy!"
Those types of outrageous claims shouldn't be tolerated.
If it was an honest mistake then I apologize for calling you out but you still should have clarified afterward; claims like that send a lot of people into a frenzy.
Outrageous claims really, are you aware of WHY the conversations abruptly stopped the previous time it was discussed on different sites? Some people went into a frenzy alright for the gall of having the subject even being discussed online. Was he supposed to follow up and state that his theory was nonsense because of a small group "that he was unaware of at the time, including possibly yourself" of people who are benefiting from it? If that story is true it comes at a severe price for many more other players who are not aware that THEY ARE BEING CHEATED. I play for the most part against ASM and I have my own opinion on their operations but realize that my own sample size for results "I am at EV" and what I have observed will never be enough, so I will reserve my opinion on them. Still, in the back of my mind, I am unsure that at any point in time I could be playing against a CHEATING device. If you are making money on the play "and again if" and you were unhappy that KJ and others did not state they were wrong in their observations are, in my opinion, beyond ludicrous expectations.
Last edited: