Card-Counting Is A Waste Of Time For Real Profitting

While counting cards today to make money is mostly a myth--thanks to the software and safeguards casinos utilize that effectively combat every counter but the occasional "anonymous professional" who can basically make up any scenario they want without having to back up what they claim--doing so has never helped anyone make millions year after year. If counters were lucky, they supplemented whatever primary income they already had.

While people like Stanford Wong and his silly "Wonging" concept has had the "advantage player community" continually going gaga over everything he says and writes, he cunningly makes them look the other way as his real life's earnings has come via the same method most Americans make their living: hard work. In his case, he writes about and sells casino gaming strategies. Period. Good work Stan!

While all this has been going on, Don Johnson has simply and methodically made fools of everyone in the blackjack community by winning millions upon millions, year after year. With him, there has never been any of the nonsense people sell when he plays. He sticks to a solid understanding of the game, playing basic strategy, and most of all--he uses a healthy enough bankroll that allows him to easily get through the dry spells. In other words, he uses his head and does not waste his time trying to count cards and being undetected at the same time--something nobody can really do in the long term today.

DJ is a big name who plays big. You can see how his hefty bankroll makes him a winner in an otherwise "-EV" setting. Well, how many of you bazookas know anyone who only plays mostly -ev video poker, and who does so with a $171,600 overall bankroll....and $57,200/session....with a relatively paltry win goal of $2500? And consistently wins!

I think you're starting to get the point.

I don't know a damned thing about current blackjack, as I haven't played in more than 25 years, and I played so little, I don't recall if I ever really knew what I was doing. LOL. But Argentino/Singer is once again not being terribly honest in his reporting. Don Johnson, and this is ridiculously well known, won money playing negative EV blackjack because he suckered competing casinos into giving him loss rebates on short-term bases, sometimes just days. So he used his bankroll as a lure to sucker brain-dead management into offering large, short-term rebates, therefore flipping the numbers, and creating...are you ready for this? An obvious advantage play.

Now if I know this, and I don't know diddly about blackjack, and I don't stay particularly well-informed regarding various whale action, how can the inestimable Argentino not know this? So if Argentino gets the basic fundamentals of what Don Johnson does wrong, why even post such gibberish? In fact, Don Johnson's manipulation of repeated, competing rebates is a complete rejection of the Argentino theory that rebates have minimal value.

Man, there had to be a better example than Don Johnson to peddle voodoo.

Although I did like him a lot in Miami Vice.

From the various articles I've read and the interviews and programs I watched Johnson used every tool possible to beat the casinos INCLUDING card counting. But it was his giant bankroll that opened the door to the special rules and rebates that he says gave him the advantage. Out of all the articles and videos I saw only one actual reference to card counting and hole carding and in that case "an associate" of Johnson was playing at the table.

Card counting is proven to work. The question is can you do it undetected long enough to make enough?

What Redietz said. That is among the stupidest OPs I have ever read. Even if there were no card counting, he definitely used AP tactics that would, in Singer's terms, disqualify him from, "Winning at gambling."

Alan, depends on how much is, "Enough," does it not?

Casinos do stupid shit sometimes for big money to come in, even against proven advantage players. If Don Johnson isn't enough of an example, just look at the two casinos that rolled out the carpet for Phil Ivey at Baccarat.

There's no question that if you are known to bet big the casinos will welcome you and give you special "terms." Didn't Ivey ask for a particular dealer and brand of cards?

The casinos think they can't lose until someone shows they can lose.

But can any "regular player" get those same terms? Money talks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

From the various articles I've read and the interviews and programs I watched Johnson used every tool possible to beat the casinos INCLUDING card counting. But it was his giant bankroll that opened the door to the special rules and rebates that he says gave him the advantage. Out of all the articles and videos I saw only one actual reference to card counting and hole carding and in that case "an associate" of Johnson was playing at the table.

Card counting is proven to work. The question is can you do it undetected long enough to make enough?

---

Exactly! He used NUMEROUS AP techniques during his run.

As for Rob's post, he's partially correct. CC'ing is a very slow, tough grind. But there is still money to be made at it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

There's no question that if you are known to bet big the casinos will welcome you and give you special "terms." Didn't Ivey ask for a particular dealer and brand of cards?

The casinos think they can't lose until someone shows they can lose.

But can any "regular player" get those same terms? Money talks.

---

Oh, Christ, more than that!

He asked for a specific dealer, a specific brand of cards, he wanted the dealer to speak the language of his accomplice, he asked the dealer to TURN THE CARDS FOR HIM (edge-sorting) before returning them to the shoe, he wanted the same cards to be used during his entire trip...I wrote an entire article about it if you're interested:

https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/i...highest-court/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gratuitous Quote of My Own Article

If there is one thing that poker and baccarat have in common it is the fact that they are both gambling games, so when one of the greatest poker players in the history of the world is eager to play any sort of gambling game at your casino, you can probably bet your sweet ass that he is going to be at some sort of advantage. The nice thing about making that bet, of course, is that you won’t be losing your ass!

---

I agree with mission. This is the stupidest post Rob has ever made. And that is saying something because many of his posts qualify as stupid and are in contention.

Don Johnson has absolutely nothing to do with card counting. I don't know why anyone would bring up Don Johnson's advantage play in the same breath as card counting. Johnson's advantage came from the lucrative rebates that he negotiated with the casinos. What he did has little to even do with blackjack. He could have played almost any casino game under those terms and played with a huge advantage. He chose blackjack because it has one of the lower house edges, under 1% in most cases.

AND Rob is wrong as he almost always is, in that Johnson could not do this year after year. His play lasted about 6 months, in 2011 and that was the end. Casinos stopped giving him that rebate.

Obviously this thread was Rob's answer to my thread and posts discrediting his video poker claims. The difference is that I used mathematics to prove Rob's claims impossible. He came up with some weird story that isn't even about card counting and got most of the facts wrong. ;)

Oddly enough, the only useful thing I see so far in this thread, is a comment by Alan Mendelson of all people. Giving credit where credit is due, I am quoting the comment, below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Card counting is proven to work. The question is can you do it undetected long enough to make enough?

---

In a rare moment of clarity (maybe the blind squirrel theory), Alan is 100% correct. Card counting is proven to work. And the challenge in today's environment is to figure ways to be able to get play in. But it is less about being "undetectable" than it is about identifying what tolerance and comfort levels are. This has to do with betting levels, session lengths and session wins, which all tie in together. Short sessions at moderate levels takes care of everything.....at least for now.

But I do worry about how long I, or any other card counter really has. Time and technology are definitely working against us. BUT players have been saying that since the day I started and that was 15 years ago. I think we have another 5 years. No guarantees after that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mission146

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

There's no question that if you are known to bet big the casinos will welcome you and give you special "terms." Didn't Ivey ask for a particular dealer and brand of cards?

The casinos think they can't lose until someone shows they can lose.

But can any "regular player" get those same terms? Money talks.

---

Oh, Christ, more than that!

He asked for a specific dealer, a specific brand of cards, he wanted the dealer to speak the language of his accomplice, he asked the dealer to TURN THE CARDS FOR HIM (edge-sorting) before returning them to the shoe, he wanted the same cards to be used during his entire trip...I wrote an entire article about it if you're interested:

https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/i...highest-court/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gratuitous Quote of My Own Article

If there is one thing that poker and baccarat have in common it is the fact that they are both gambling games, so when one of the greatest poker players in the history of the world is eager to play any sort of gambling game at your casino, you can probably bet your sweet ass that he is going to be at some sort of advantage. The nice thing about making that bet, of course, is that you won’t be losing your ass!

---

---

About Ivey. 8:19-8:26 says it all.

https://youtu.be/YSPD1iWcyYY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I agree with mission. This is the stupidest post Rob has ever made. And that is saying something because many of his posts qualify as stupid and are in contention.

Don Johnson has absolutely nothing to do with card counting. I don't know why anyone would bring up Don Johnson's advantage play in the same breath as card counting. Johnson's advantage came from the lucrative rebates that he negotiated with the casinos. What he did has little to even do with blackjack. He could have played almost any casino game under those terms and played with a huge advantage. He chose blackjack because it has one of the lower house edges, under 1% in most cases.

AND Rob is wrong as he almost always is, in that Johnson could not do this year after year. His play lasted about 6 months, in 2011 and that was then end. Casinos stopped giving him that rebate.

Obviously this thread was Rob's answer to my thread and posts discrediting his video poker claims. The difference is that I used mathematics to prove Rob's claims impossible. He came up with some weird story that isn't even about card counting and got most of the facts wrong. ;)

Oddly enough, the only useful thing I see so far in this thread, is a comment by Alan Mendelson of all people. Giving credit where credit is due, I am quoting the comment, below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Card counting is proven to work. The question is can you do it undetected long enough to make enough?

---

In a rare moment of clarity (maybe the blind squirrel theory), Alan is 100% correct. Card counting is proven to work. And the challenge in today's environment is to figure ways to be able to get play in. But it is less about being "undetectable" than it is about identifying what tolerance and comfort levels are. This has to do with betting levels, session lengths and session wins, which all tie in together. Short sessions at moderate levels takes care of everything.....at least for now.

But I do worry about how long I, or any other card counter really has. Time and technology are definitely working against us. BUT players have been saying that since the day I started and that was 15 years ago. I think we have another 5 years. No guarantees after that.

---

Ahh, but he WAS counting, ST'ing, HC,ing, and causing huge dealer errors.

Don Johnson made a fool of those who think loss rebates have no value. Lose $1 million, I only owe $800,000. Win $1 million, I’ll keep it all. Rinse and repeat. That was an extraordinarily EV+ play.

JBJB,

That's a great quote! We need a thank you button here. This feels like a wasted post, but I wanted to acknowledge how good a quote you highlighted.

Card counting is the biggest #fake news I’ve heard in a long time. It makes people think that they can beat blackjack, despite there being a built in house edge mechanism. Like people thinking they have a negative EV video poker system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dankyone

Don Johnson made a fool of those who think loss rebates have no value. Lose $1 million, I only owe $800,000. Win $1 million, I’ll keep it all. Rinse and repeat. That was an extraordinarily EV+ play.

---

My understanding is that DJ never used the loss rebate...he had it, but never needed it.

If he never used the rebate, then how did it affect his results?

Kewlj you have a short memory. I've said that before about card counting. It's proven to work when you can do it.

You might not have been on this forum when I told about a video editor I worked with at KCAL. He was a very good card counter but blew it because he didn't hide it.

The story I told was about a weekend we had in Vegas about 15 years ago where we played craps with a half dozen other reporters and editors from KCAL. My buddy lost big. On the drive home we stopped at Primm and he wanted to play blackjack.

$5 tables so I joined in though I hate the game. His blunder: he went from $5 bets to a single $100 bet when the count changed and the pit boss came over and simply said "stop."

They let him continue to play but no more of those big increases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dankyone

Don Johnson made a fool of those who think loss rebates have no value. Lose $1 million, I only owe $800,000. Win $1 million, I’ll keep it all. Rinse and repeat. That was an extraordinarily EV+ play.

---

My understanding is that DJ never used the loss rebate...he had it, but never needed it.

If he never used the rebate, then how did it affect his results?

---

The loss rebate was just one thing he negotiated. I think the most interesting thing he did was having others at the table to cause the dealers to make errors. He gloated about that. Plus his special rules. And all of it was because he had a big bankroll.

Didn't some big Microsoft exec negotiate to have a special video poker paytable at Caesars because he had a bankroll?

Of course he used the loss rebate. It was a “marker reduction” of 20%. After he was down a certain amount (usually $1mm but sometimes as little as $500k) he would end the trip, Pay back only 80% his loss, and start up the same play down the street.

Massive advantage play if you only pay 80% of your losses but collect 100% of your winnings. He had the same deal with 3-4 casinos in AC. It didn’t last long since he was crushing them with it.

Dankyone summed it up admirably.

Now here's the thing. The original poster has been silent. No f****** kidding. How is he going to try to spin this embarrassment of misinformation on his part? That he's given us the great insight that big bankrolls are advantageous? That "big bankrolls" are an advantage play? LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dankyone

Of course he used the loss rebate. It was a “marker reduction” of 20%. After he was down a certain amount (usually $1mm but sometimes as little as $500k) he would end the trip, Pay back only 80% his loss, and start up the same play down the street.

---

That's not the way I read that it happened.

Johnson was quoted that he never even used the rebate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

While counting cards today to make money is mostly a myth--thanks to the software and safeguards casinos utilize that effectively combat every counter but the occasional "anonymous professional" who can basically make up any scenario they want without having to back up what they claim--doing so has never helped anyone make millions year after year. If counters were lucky, they supplemented whatever primary income they already had.
.

---

Well Rob, let's put it this way. I wouldn't play without exact knowledge of what has played, and more importantly, what still remains. My shoes are on my feet. My ladies shoes fill two closets. And, that's all I have to say about that.

No. I wouldn't touch a pitch game with a conventional count. I'm not saying it's bad or can't return income with patience and discipline. I am saying it's not worth my time for several reasons.

However, the only supplemental income I know is what I give to my kids. So I can't complain about what the game gives to me. But it's work. Still a damn good job.