The Adventures of MDawg (in progress)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tasha

Well, some IDIOT "New Member," named Frauddawg is already ragging and dragging on Mdawg on WOV... Just his NAME is banworthy...What's the Over/Under on Frauddawg being BANNED by tomorrow? I think its Over in more ways than one for Frauddawg....

---

Seriously, do you really think this person is worried about being banned? You say the dumbest things.

And no fraud Mdawg is not me. Just reading it, I thought jeez, people are going to think that is me. I probably would have thought that if I didn't know that it wasn't. But I do think it is great. I don't usually like the idea of sockpuppets, but what is good for the goose is good for the gander, or whatever the saying is. So 3 loud cheers from the peanut gallery for fraud Mdawg, telling it like it is. And he is right about the loss rebate. Not how it works today, maybe 10-15 years ago, but not today at that level. Just ANOTHER piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit. Given enough rope these guys always hang themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tasha

Well, some IDIOT "New Member," named Frauddawg is already ragging and dragging on Mdawg on WOV... Just his NAME is banworthy...What's the Over/Under on Frauddawg being BANNED by tomorrow? I think its Over in more ways than one for Frauddawg....

---

Seriously, do you really think this person is worried about being banned? You say the dumbest things.

And no fraud Mdawg is not me. Just reading it, I thought jeez, people are going to think that is me. I probably would have thought that if I didn't know that it wasn't. But I do think it is great. I don't usually like the idea of sockpuppets, but what is good for the goose is good for the gander, or whatever the saying is. So 3 loud cheers from the peanut gallery for fraud Mdawg, telling it like it is. And he is right about the loss rebate. Not how it works today, maybe 10-15 years ago, but not today at that level. Just ANOTHER piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit. Given enough rope these guys always hang themselves.

---

I never said Frauddawg was worried about being banned. I just pointed out he most likely will be banned by tomorrow. It is clear that Frauddawg is NOT a Legitimate Newbie... Legitimate Newbies don't usually sink their claws into Longer Time Members....

I never thought Frauddawg was you....

These guys keep bringing up Don Johnson and his loss rebates. While that always been widely documented, he did not need them. He was playing with "top blackjack pros" and had a huge edge to begin with. Dig around the internet a bit and you'll find the true story of how he crushed those casinos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

These guys keep bringing up Don Johnson and his loss rebates. While that always been widely documented, he did not need them. He was playing with "top blackjack pros" and had a huge edge to begin with. Dig around the internet a bit and you'll find the true story of how he crushed those casinos.

---

It's to my understanding that he DID take a few loss rebates. But I agree, for the most part, he beat the game "str8 up" without the rebates.

Just sooo many pieces to the puzzle that don't fit. More and more every day.

I used this analogy before, but did you ever go visit someone in a retirement home, or Veteran's hospital or home? You start putting together the jigsaw puzzle and realize half the pieces don't fit and aren't even for that puzzle. Here are two pieces that fit together, brown and green. Looks like part of a tree. Problem is that it is a puzzle of the space shuttle in outer space. That is what we are dealing with here. You always have a few numb skulls, like coach belly that try to force pieces together that don't fit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

These guys keep bringing up Don Johnson and his loss rebates. While that always been widely documented, he did not need them. He was playing with "top blackjack pros" and had a huge edge to begin with. Dig around the internet a bit and you'll find the true story of how he crushed those casinos.

---

It's to my understanding that he DID take a few loss rebates. But I agree, for the most part, he beat the game "str8 up" without the rebates.

---

He may have used some, but as mentioned, he didn't need them. Just like Ivey, he was just the middleman with the large bankroll.

I read that the casinos gave him fifty grand a day "show up money."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

I read that the casinos gave him fifty grand a day "show up money."

---

Pretty much the same as giving the plebs $10 in slot free play per week.

Perhaps, but given the extended length of his play (many, many sessions over many days) it certainly added to his advantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

These guys keep bringing up Don Johnson and his loss rebates. While that always been widely documented, he did not need them. He was playing with "top blackjack pros" and had a huge edge to begin with. Dig around the internet a bit and you'll find the true story of how he crushed those casinos.

---

It's to my understanding that he DID take a few loss rebates. But I agree, for the most part, he beat the game "str8 up" without the rebates.

---

He may have used some, but as mentioned, he didn't need them. Just like Ivey, he was just the middleman with the large bankroll.

---

I agree. DickWeedDawg claimed he never used any. When I asked him about that claim, he pulled the good old... I'm not responding to your post trick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Perhaps, but given the extended length of his play (many, many sessions over many days) it certainly added to his advantage.

---

Certainly. I don't think anyone will dispute that.

The whole point was, the general public thinks DJ and his "bj HoF crew" only had the loss rebate angle when in reality, it was much more then that.

I'm not a blackjack player but I know that loss rebates aren't more than 100% of what you lose. So for someone to beat the casinos for millions they had to win millions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

I'm not a blackjack player but I know that loss rebates aren't more than 100% of what you lose. So for someone to beat the casinos for millions they had to win millions.

---

Looks like you aren't getting the loss rebate, Andrew. let me see if I can help.

So a player has a 50% loss rebate based on each days play.
day 1: he wins a million dollars. No rebate
day 2: he loses a million dollars. rebated $500k
day 3: he wins a million dollars. No rebate
day 4: he loses a million dollars. rebated $500k

4 day total $0 (2 wins, 2 losses of a million dollars each ) But with the two, 500k rebates, he is up a million dollars even though he won exactly $0.

Let's deal with real numbers. Don Johnson said he negotiated a 20% loss rebate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

I'm not a blackjack player but I know that loss rebates aren't more than 100% of what you lose. So for someone to beat the casinos for millions they had to win millions.

---

Obviously it's not that frequent but There have been 150% loss rebate promos. Alan RS_, others and I had this discussion before IIRC. it's funny since Alan was saying the same thing you are attempting to say.


Also, you dont have to actually lose to get a rebate... IF you were to rathole.


If you search out and play nice rebate promotions, you will see a profit very quickly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Let's deal with real numbers. Don Johnson said he negotiated a 20% loss rebate.

---

It doesn't matter. What matters is the shortness of the terms of the rebate.

I have rebates at a certain offshore. Unfortunately, it's for six months (which is actually damned good, in my book). If the rebate were weekly, I'd have them completely by the cajones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Let's deal with real numbers. Don Johnson said he negotiated a 20% loss rebate.

---

And that's all you need to have a significant advantage. There are people that travel the world looking for smaller % loss rebates deals, and they do very well.

As KJ pointed out with a simple easy to understand example that you dont have to be a winner from the game itself to make a profit, your profits come from the loss rebates. If you happen to beat the game st8 up then you will obviously make much more. However, if this is the type of thing you are doing over and over there's a good chance things will average out on the game itself, and you are left with your profits FROM THE REBATES.

None of this, or the discussion about Don Johnson matters in regards to the Mdawg situation. Only 2 things matter about that.

1). Mdawg is not playing any where near enough to qualify for a loss rebate at the high end properties he is describing. Neither is he playing anywhere near high enough to get the high-end suites he claims for weeks at a time, but I guess that is a different discussion. Lets keep this to the rebate.

2.) 55 winning sessions, through a number of trips over a number of years and no mention of a loss rebate. Only mention of winning...EVERY day. Finally he tells of us a losing, day, which everyone saw coming as cover for this "witnessing of his play" and guess what? Magically, all of the sudden there is a loss rebate. This guy is just bullshit stacked on top of bullshit. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Let's deal with real numbers. Don Johnson said he negotiated a 20% loss rebate.

---

It doesn't matter. What matters is the shortness of the terms of the rebate.

I have rebates at a certain offshore. Unfortunately, it's for six months (which is actually damned good, in my book). If the rebate were weekly, I'd have them completely by the cajones.

---

I was going to mention the online rebates since I have seen some that were up to $1,500 for 200%. I didn't want to get into the whole online debate about getting paid, fairness and whatnot. One must do their research and tests and know what they are doing when it comes to online playing and then figure out the risk vs the reward long term for themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Let's deal with real numbers. Don Johnson said he negotiated a 20% loss rebate.

---

It doesn't matter. What matters is the shortness of the terms of the rebate.

I have rebates at a certain offshore. Unfortunately, it's for six months (which is actually damned good, in my book). If the rebate were weekly, I'd have them completely by the cajones.

---

I was going to mention the online rebates since I have seen some that were up to $1,500 for 200%. I didn't want to get into the whole online debate about getting paid, fairness and whatnot. One must do their research and tests and know what they are doing when it comes to online playing and then figure out the risk vs the reward long term for themselves.

---

I'm strictly betting sports, and I was happy to have found an offshore that'll give me a 25% loss rebate every six months (it's actually 12.5% because the rebate comes as free play).

If I found somewhere willing to rebate me every week or every month, I'd bet my brains out on every sport even if I didn't know what I was doing.