Hatred on this Forum

No mickeycrimm. I never thought for a minute that kewlj could cash in his accumulated EV. I made the comment to point out there was no such thing as accumulating EV; my comment was satirical.

Now other forum members... months later... are saying what I said.

It's time for you to stop attacking me. I liked you when you posted useful information and before you became Super Troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackhole

Quick hypothetical question for you AP pros.

Let’s say you guys put me on a play that mathematically is worth $100.00 per hour. I play exactly as required for max advantage. Yet, for the first day of play, I play for 10 hours and end up losing $100.00 dollars per hour for a total loss of 1K. I go back the following day and unfortunately the same results happen. These same results sadly repeat for the whole week. I’m now down 7K.

The following week I only lose 4K under the same conditions. I’m now down 11K. The following week I lose another 6K. I’m now down after 3 weeks and 210 hours of play a total of 17K. All my free play went down the drain the same way, and I ate all the free comped food and still had to pay out of my pocket for most of it. Amazingly everyone around me are hitting all kinds of good shit, royals, etc.

How long should I expect to grind it out on the same play to recover the 17K I lost in cash along with the 21K I should have won, plus the additional $100.00 dollars per hour I should be winning to recover these losses to become mathematically sound again? Do I now have 38K plus expenses in the accumulated EV bank?

Then for an added hypothetical situation I eventually after months of endless 10-hour days on this play eventually end up losing my whole 100K bankroll. Should I get a loan knowing eventually I have to recover my banked accumulated EV along with all the profits the math said I must have?

---

No matter how much you are up or down the expectation is still $100 an hour. If you win $1000 in the first hour your expectation in the next hour is $100. If you are down $1000 in the first hour your expectation in the next hour is $100. You can shove your "accumulated EV" up your ass because it means nothing as far as future results go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

"Accumulated EV" is past tense not future tense.

---

If we go back to when KJ originally brought this up, it sounded as if he was ok with a 8,800 loss because he had accumulated lots of EV and it would avrage out and he would get back that loss plus his accumulated EV. IMO, It was getting dangerously close to the dueness theory.

He had good value. And of course, If he keeps putting himself into good value situations eventually good things should happen.

I just have a problem wrapping my head around if an individual can accumulate EV and what exactly does one mean by that? It might be the wrong term to use.

---

When I read KJ's post my take was he was having a day where he was quickly getting into and staying in heavy positive counts. The kind of thing you would like to see everyday but don't. But it was a bad day for results just like a casino has shitty days at roulette even though they have a massive edge.

Now for "accumulated EV." I'm always measuring expectation and comparing plays to see which one I should concentrate on or play off first. Then I "play off the expectation." That's the term I use. That's the same thing as saying "accumulating expectation." One thing I know for sure, if I don't "play off/accumulate" the expectation I don't have a chance at making any money.

In no way did I think KJ meant that he could cash in the accumulated EV on a later day. That thought never crossed my mind. That bullshit was concocted by Alan just so he could fuck with KJ. Then Argentino jumped in with the "due to hit" bullshit. This from an asshole that in the past has used the term "rising probability."

---

KJ has quite a limited imagination. There likely wasn't such a day for him, such a low-key and simple bean-counter. He can't say that he's good at it because he knows none of the math, isn't even able to post it up.

You guys, likely, spent all this time arguing about nothing, again. Millions of people have played blackjack, in one form or another, but KJ, Moses and a few others scattered across the internet on corny forums, are the only ones to crow about it? That's one hell of a conspiracy kept under wraps.

Make-believe "shills" trying to suck others into their misery. Ha, the good guys for the casinos to love.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

No mickeycrimm. I never thought for a minute that kewlj could cash in his accumulated EV. I made the comment to point out there was no such thing as accumulating EV; my comment was satirical.

Now other forum members... months later... are saying what I said.

It's time for you to stop attacking me. I liked you when you posted useful information and before you became Super Troll.

---

The subject was beat to death a couple of months ago. Then all of a sudden you bring the issue back up like it's brand new and you want some answers. You can't keep hiding behind "that's explanation is no good. Give me another one. And your new explanation is no good. Give me another." It's no one else's fault that you don't get it because it has been explained over and over and over to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Normal is what you don't have to define. But leave it to an AP to mess that up. "Hey, I feel normal, but don't ask me to explain it."

Perhaps, it's the mental state free of the sadistic and masochistic gyrations of gambling. In general, getting yourself out of the baloney of life at least enough to laugh and cheer at the ones who, eg, have to compare themselves to donut and fry flippers to reconcile their sitting at a blackjack table or slot machine all day/night.

Many of those "flippers" go on to build up those businesses for themselves to employ others alongside themselves in their own shifts, by the age of 40. By age 50, they no longer work, except for overseeing the "flipping", but then take home a hundred thousand a year (before taxes).

---

What if I told you the opposite was?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELYNB1ILYuQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Millions of people have played blackjack, in one form or another, but KJ, Moses and a few others scattered across the internet on corny forums, are the only ones to crow about it? That's one hell of a conspiracy kept under wraps.

Make-believe "shills" trying to suck others into their misery. Ha, the good guys for the casinos to love.

---

Are you sure about that Bill? I could care less about newbie's, other players, APs, whatever, I wouldn't train anyone. It's better for me if they don't play.

But I'll be your huckleberry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

No mickeycrimm. I never thought for a minute that kewlj could cash in his accumulated EV. I made the comment to point out there was no such thing as accumulating EV; my comment was satirical.

Now other forum members... months later... are saying what I said.

It's time for you to stop attacking me. I liked you when you posted useful information and before you became Super Troll.

---

The subject was beat to death a couple of months ago. Then all of a sudden you bring the issue back up like it's brand new and you want some answers. You can't keep hiding behind "that's explanation is no good. Give me another one. And your new explanation is no good. Give me another." It's no one else's fault that you don't get it because it has been explained over and over and over to you.

---

mickey keep your pants on. kew couldn't explain it then and he can't explain it now. But apologists like you don't like how it makes the pussified pork chop look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Millions of people have played blackjack, in one form or another, but KJ, Moses and a few others scattered across the internet on corny forums, are the only ones to crow about it? That's one hell of a conspiracy kept under wraps.

Make-believe "shills" trying to suck others into their misery. Ha, the good guys for the casinos to love.

---

I could care less about newbie's, other players, APs, whatever, I wouldn't train anyone. It's better for me if they don't play.

---

You have a very odd way of showing any of that. Must be reverse-reverse-reverse psychology?

You don't want others to do what you do, but here you are telling us all, a bunch of strangers, and who knows who, about how well and easily you do it. You don't care about other AP's, but here you are to read about, and encourage, them. You won't train anyone, but here you are full of gambling "insights".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

But I'll be your huckleberry.

---

Is that the line you used on your ex? How well did that work out for you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

You have a very odd way of showing any of that. Must be reverse-reverse-reverse psychology?

You don't want others to do what you do, but here you are telling us all, a bunch of strangers, and who knows who, about how well and easily you do it. You don't care about other AP's, but here you are to read about, and encourage, them. You won't train anyone, but here you are full of gambling "insights".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

But I'll be your huckleberry.

---

Is that the line you used on your ex? How well did that work out for you?

---

Naw. IT's just guys like you piss me off enough to respond. ;) Alan ask a question. I answered. Seems to me like you ducked my offer. No?

I didn't say that I didn't like you, or am trying to piss you off. Contrary to popular belief, around here, I'm just not much good at talking corn. Were you offering me something? Mmmm. What do I have to do to get it? Do I have to bend over? Or die first?

Quote:

---

One common belief is that the term "huckleberry" is idiomatic. It was made famous by John "Doc" Holliday and originates from his home state of Georgia. It was likely a corruption of the term "hackle bearer." Hackles are the handles on the side of a coffin. Thus, the statement, "I'll be your huckleberry" means, "I'll still be around when you're dead." https://www.quora.com/What-does-it-m...ur-huckleberry

---

Quote:

---

Quite how I’m your huckleberry came out of all that with the sense of the man for the job isn’t obvious. It seems that the word came to be given as a mark of affection or comradeship to one’s partner or sidekick. There is often an identification of oneself as a willing helper or assistant about it, as here in True to Himself, by Edward Stratemeyer, dated 1900: “ ‘I will pay you for whatever you do for me.’ ‘Then I’m your huckleberry. Who are you and what do you want to know?’ ”. Despite the obvious associations, it doesn’t seem to derive directly from Mark Twain’s books." http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-huc1.htm

---

I'm offering the opportunity for you to be the house. Should be a good deal for you to pit yourself against a degenerate, dipshit gambler, who has lost a ton of money. No? Good deal for me to play without restrictions. Single deck straight up the way Edwin used to play. What do ya say Johnny Ringo?

It seems you're saying all blackjack forums, and possilbly gambling forums, like this one should go away. I'm not saying I disagree. Just wanted to make sure of your stance and point out, you also, are posting on gambling forum. Are you on some kind of crusade?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackhole

Quick hypothetical question for you AP pros.

Let’s say you guys put me on a play that mathematically is worth $100.00 per hour. I play exactly as required for max advantage. Yet, for the first day of play, I play for 10 hours and end up losing $100.00 dollars per hour for a total loss of 1K. I go back the following day and unfortunately the same results happen. These same results sadly repeat for the whole week. I’m now down 7K.

The following week I only lose 4K under the same conditions. I’m now down 11K. The following week I lose another 6K. I’m now down after 3 weeks and 210 hours of play a total of 17K. All my free play went down the drain the same way, and I ate all the free comped food and still had to pay out of my pocket for most of it. Amazingly everyone around me are hitting all kinds of good shit, royals, etc.

How long should I expect to grind it out on the same play to recover the 17K I lost in cash along with the 21K I should have won, plus the additional $100.00 dollars per hour I should be winning to recover these losses to become mathematically sound again? Do I now have 38K plus expenses in the accumulated EV bank?

Then for an added hypothetical situation I eventually after months of endless 10-hour days on this play eventually end up losing my whole 100K bankroll. Should I get a loan knowing eventually I have to recover my banked accumulated EV along with all the profits the math said I must have?

---

No matter how much you are up or down the expectation is still $100 an hour. If you win $1000 in the first hour your expectation in the next hour is $100. If you are down $1000 in the first hour your expectation in the next hour is $100. You can shove your "accumulated EV" up your ass because it means nothing as far as future results go.

---

Thanks for posting this mickeycrimm. You just said there's no such thing as accumulating EV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackhole

Quick hypothetical question for you AP pros.

Let’s say you guys put me on a play that mathematically is worth $100.00 per hour. I play exactly as required for max advantage. Yet, for the first day of play, I play for 10 hours and end up losing $100.00 dollars per hour for a total loss of 1K. I go back the following day and unfortunately the same results happen. These same results sadly repeat for the whole week. I’m now down 7K.

The following week I only lose 4K under the same conditions. I’m now down 11K. The following week I lose another 6K. I’m now down after 3 weeks and 210 hours of play a total of 17K. All my free play went down the drain the same way, and I ate all the free comped food and still had to pay out of my pocket for most of it. Amazingly everyone around me are hitting all kinds of good shit, royals, etc.

How long should I expect to grind it out on the same play to recover the 17K I lost in cash along with the 21K I should have won, plus the additional $100.00 dollars per hour I should be winning to recover these losses to become mathematically sound again? Do I now have 38K plus expenses in the accumulated EV bank?

Then for an added hypothetical situation I eventually after months of endless 10-hour days on this play eventually end up losing my whole 100K bankroll. Should I get a loan knowing eventually I have to recover my banked accumulated EV along with all the profits the math said I must have?

---

No matter how much you are up or down the expectation is still $100 an hour. If you win $1000 in the first hour your expectation in the next hour is $100. If you are down $1000 in the first hour your expectation in the next hour is $100. You can shove your "accumulated EV" up your ass because it means nothing as far as future results go.

---

Thanks for posting this mickeycrimm. You just said there's no such thing as accumulating EV.

---

No, I didn't. Your problem is your interpretation of what accumulated EV is. I don't have that problem.

Mickeycrimm right now I think only you and kewlj are drinking the same kool-aid.

Alan. I thinking of a number between 1 and 10. Can you guess what it is? :) Whatever your answer is, I would say no. It seems that is what you are doing with this term. Hard to believe some keep falling for it over and over again.

There several terms in sportsbetting. But it comes down to my research and my communication with the ticket writer. As long as they get it right is all that matters. If I start throwing a bunch of slang terms at them, the risk of them screwing up increases not decreases.

As for KJ. I've never quite understood what he does? Let alone the rather large group that does it for even more at stake and gets away with it. They even have parties, where many attend, and sit around talking about how much they make, how far they travel, and how easy it is to do. It doesn't sound like much fun to me. Why KJ takes $20k hits without ducking? I'll never know. Therefore, I do not understand his need to lead others.
Not my circus. Not my monkey. I'm curious though, why is it yours?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

Alan. I thinking of a number between 1 and 10. Can you guess what it is? :) Whatever your answer is, I would say no. It seems that is what you are doing with this term. Hard to believe some keep falling for it over and over again.

There several terms in sportsbetting. But it comes down to my research and my communication with the ticket writer. As long as they get it right is all that matters. If I start throwing a bunch of slang terms at them, the risk of them screwing up increases not decreases.

As for KJ. I've never quite understood what he does? Let alone the rather large group that does it for even more at stake and gets away with it. They even have parties, where many attend, and sit around talking about how much they make, how far they travel, and how easy it is to do. It doesn't sound like much fun to me. Why KJ takes $20k hits without ducking? I'll never know. Therefore, I do not understand his need to lead others.
Not my circus. Not my monkey. I'm curious though, why is it yours?

---

Don't Forget kewlJ does it honestly.
He even posted how he used to take advantage of weak dealers by hole carding.
He would wake up at 3am to go to Circus Circus to take advantage of a certain dealer.
He decided that he didn't want to make free money that way so he stopped doing it.

Heck he even told on himself and everyone else about the El Cortel cheating with Shuffle Machines.
He is that good! Spider Man, Spider Man, does whatever a Spider can.

However he does take the occasional Big Bet mistake that dealers sometimes make.
He isn't perfect like RS and his crew.

There was a time when I played in the wee hours. Something eerie about the mix of those who have been up all night and those who are just getting up for the day. A deafening silence maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

I'm offering the opportunity for you to be the house. Should be a good deal for you to pit yourself against a degenerate, dipshit gambler, who has lost a ton of money. No? Good deal for me to play without restrictions. Single deck straight up the way Edwin used to play. What do ya say Johnny Ringo?

---

You mean Edward Thorp? He didn't play a lot of blackjack in the casinos. It was much easier to write it up, and, sell it for a dollar a pop. The guys who were doing the counting before him just didn't have access to the early computers, and a university degree to add the hint of professionalism.

You can make money counting, but not a life-changing amount given all the casino counter-measures. You have to bet big, but the casinos will just throw you out. Monkeys dreaming about cookie jars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

It seems you're saying all blackjack forums, and possilbly gambling forums, like this one should go away. I'm not saying I disagree. Just wanted to make sure of your stance and point out, you also, are posting on gambling forum. Are you on some kind of crusade?

---

I guess that you have to define what it means to live only once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moses

There was a time when I played in the wee hours. Something eerie about the mix of those who have been up all night and those who are just getting up for the day. A deafening silence maybe.

---

Like when we realize we are nobodies who think we are somebodies by telling others they are nobodies who think they are somebodies.

Say, when gambling forums devolve into funny casino "campfire stories", and other late-night parties.

[QUOTE=Moses;75801]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Millions of people have played blackjack, in one form or another, but KJ, Moses and a few others scattered across the internet on corny forums, are the only ones to crow about it? That's one hell of a conspiracy kept under wraps.

Make-believe "shills" trying to suck others into their misery. Ha, the good guys for the casinos to love.

---

I can now see your skill is standing at the pulpit in judgement of others. You were probably a decent dodge ball player in your day.

But since YOU decided to lump me in a group with your sermon, let me make it simple for even you to understand.

I will let you be the house in single deck blackjack straight up. DAS, All splits up to 4 cards, pay 3.2 on all blackjacks. Double down on any two cards. No round begins after 45th card. Min. bet $5 Max $500 up to 3 hands.

20 sessions. 16 times through a deck is a session. Now much to "crow" about. But I'll put my money where my mouth is. How about you?

KJ or Rob deals.