The old Western Casino on Fremont

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

No I am not "chummy" with Wizard. But I don't think we are on bad terms either (outside of the forum). If I have reason to communicate with him, I contact him via Pm and he responds. It has been that way for years. He can separate out forum shit from real life.

---

So you don't really care if he reveals more than he's told about the MDawg event?

Because you been harping on that, and insulted him about it, for a long time.

---

Of course I care. As per the event specifically Wizard was suppose to be the witness.. The expert witness. And that means revealing what he witnessed. He apparently made an agreement not to reveal what he saw, for whatever reason is beyond me. (I Think people can guess)

Less specific to the Mdawg thing, Wizard challenges people and claims all the time. He was pretty merciless with Alan.

Now Mike did say something when dawg claimed 50 wins in a row. And I am pretty sure he was behind Mdawg coming clean after claiming he won millions over 7 months. But still he allows dawg to use that forum, a forum that still bears Shacklefords name, to tell he story that defies how Las Vegas and casinos work.

I think he should say something.....but I can't force him too.

Just look at this month alone. Dawg claims he has won over $600k, in about 10 days play, playing rated, getting comps and pats on the back and casinos pit folks telling him how great he is. Mike knows that is not true.

Mike says lying isn't against the rules. Not much I can do about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

He apparently made an agreement not to reveal what he saw, for whatever reason is beyond me.

---

He revealed what he saw, he 100% confirmed MDawg's session report.

Details beyond that are not relevant to the challenge, so he agreed not to reveal any.

The guy made an agreement, and he's complying with the terms of their agreement.

Does that seem so unusual that you should disparage him?

I don't know or care what his reasons were, but what reason is there to assume that he's hiding something?

Do you think he's hiding something? What could it be?

Have you agreed not to reveal or discuss what you know about the session?

Nobody should give a flying fuck about whether someone else wins or not as just that fact alone helps nobody.

The important thing is to know what methods a person employed which led to them winning so that others could also follow suit.

For reasons one can only imagine the hound made the wiz sign an NDA prohibiting him from discussing the hound's betting methods.

Could be he just martingaled and is embarrassed to admit it, given his claims of having a photographic memory etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Could be he just martingaled and is embarrassed to admit it

---

This was discussed years ago.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gamb...95/#post803691

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDawg

To summarize: there were no long periods of flat betting. If anything, I pressed into runs quite successfully time and again, and my bets ranged from 200 – 3500. There was no Martingale betting; in fact, I would tend to lower my bet after losing a hand versus increasing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wizard

I attest that Mdawg's report is accurate, especially that all the conditions of the challenge were met.

---

Interesting.

Why then would he insist on a NDA?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Interesting.

Why then would he insist on a NDA?

---

To keep confidential all information not relevant to the challenge.

What other information should be disclosed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MDE4uBMBdI&t=4s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Interesting.

Why then would he insist on a NDA?

---

To keep confidential all information not relevant to the challenge.

What other information should be disclosed?

---

Belly is just trolling, playing games and wasting everyone's time....AGAIN. Why is no one surprised.

While the challenge was very specific, in that it was whether Dawg could have a winning session for 45 minutes or more. That served absolutely no purpose. Hell 40-45% of any gamblers playing any old stupid system will have a winning session for an hour. Proves nothing.

And while Wizard said there was no martingale played, martingale is only one form of a progression system that could have been played that would give a player better than a 50% chance to have a winning session. For example, instead of doubling up after a losing wager as true martingale goes, if that first shoe had resulted in him being down, he could have played a second shoe at higher wagers and then a third at even higher. This would be a progression system, progressing after each shoe rather than each bet, so it wouldn't be a martingale. Additionally that are negative progression systems ect that aren't martingale, but are still progression systems.

He could have even just flat bet and if behind towards the end, thrown out a very large bet to overcome all those losses if he won. AND it wasn't even a wager IIRC, it was a free roll for Dawg. He had nothing to lose, right.



BUT the bigger part of the whole thing was Dawg was claiming he was doing something that could result in long-term winning. THAT was really what this challenge or free roll was supposed to determine. AND that is where Wizard was supposed to come in. This is where his expertise was suppose to take place. And he was unable to do that when he agreed not to say what he saw. And if he had, done what he was supposed to do, we wouldn't have had to endure 5 years of dawgs goofy claims.

If Mike had said, "yeah Dawg showed a winning session, making him the winner of the challenge, but I saw nothing he was doing that would account for long-term winnings", it would have been over that day. THAT is what he was suppose to tell us. Either that or "yeah, Dawg is doing something that would account for all the long-term winning he has claimed". Wizard failed to do his job!!

Now Mike tried to make up for it what...2 years later when he did violate the agreement and basically said, Dawg was not doing something that would account for the winnings". I can't quote or link to it because Mike removed it and suspended himself for violating the agreement after Dawg threatened him.

And anyone that saw what Mike said that day, saw that he tried to say in code what he wanted to say. Paraphrasing it went something like this: "People have asked me what Mdawg does to win. let me just say again, that no betting system can overcome the house edge".

Belly can play his games but what Wizard was saying is he witnessed dawg play some sort of betting system that allowed him to win that session, and that free roll of a challenge, but in no way would account for any of the long-term winning Dawg has claimed.

If Dawg were doing something that would account for all the winning he has claimed for more than 5 years now, he would want Wizard to say that, not prohibit him from saying so. And Mike could have said that without giving away what it was. But that is not what occurred and that should tell anyone who still cares all they need to know.

But if Dawg wants to rectify the situation, he can STILL at any time allow Mike to say what he saw. NOT giving away any secret, just whether Dawg is doing something that would account for all the fantasy winning he claimed. Dawg could do that any day. But Don't hold your breath.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Get help.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

MDawg has his challenge available for any session that is in dispute. Really for forums it doesn't get anymore stand up than that.

I'd say the only thing that happened today is it rained bad news for you. Make sure everything is elevated on milk crates in your tunnel abode so it doesn't wash away.

---

Yeah, who didn't know a trollish response by Dawg would occur? He can't legitimately answer.....so he trolls.

That is what he does and that is what he is! And no matter what he does says, or escalates his claims as he has done for months now, EVERYONE KNOWS IT!!

He is basically EvenBob/Spike now, except Dawg posts some interesting pictures along the way. Way to go old boy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Nobody should give a flying fuck about whether someone else wins or not as just that fact alone helps nobody.

The important thing is to know what methods a person employed which led to them winning so that others could also follow suit.

For reasons one can only imagine the hound made the wiz sign an NDA prohibiting him from discussing the hound's betting methods.

Could be he just martingaled and is embarrassed to admit it, given his claims of having a photographic memory etc.

---

V, did it ever occur to you that there are certain people who understand their game of choice on a level beyond what the common AP or gambler does, and as such he or she is able to exploit that superior understanding and turn it into an unusual amount of profiting?

Most people are like you, kew, and others here. Even if mdawg were to attempt to enlighten those who simply don't want to believe him, you people wouldn't understand it anyway. And kew's non-stop/nonsensical bloviating about "That's NOT How LV Works!" and "He can't POSSIBLY win what he reports he does because it goes against the math!" is just him and his inexperience and envy spewing. People "win against the math" all the time, and some people DO it all the time, somehow. And you know what else? There are some who somehow continually get showered with comps as they win. You and others may not understand it, but there ARE those who have done it.

So knock off all the baloney about why you think mdawg should release his method. It would go so far over most peoples' heads that they'd just get more frustrated anyway.

And again, you have my permission to slap down that lying little twit and his "no one should have to provide proof of anything on a forum" BS....unless it's he who's doing the demanding.

Eagles moneyline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Nobody should give a flying fuck about whether someone else wins or not as just that fact alone helps nobody.

The important thing is to know what methods a person employed which led to them winning so that others could also follow suit.

For reasons one can only imagine the hound made the wiz sign an NDA prohibiting him from discussing the hound's betting methods.

Could be he just martingaled and is embarrassed to admit it, given his claims of having a photographic memory etc.

---

V, did it ever occur to you that there are certain people who understand their game of choice on a level beyond what the common AP or gambler does, and as such he or she is able to exploit that superior understanding and turn it into an unusual amount of profiting?

Most people are like you, kew, and others here. Even if mdawg were to attempt to enlighten those who simply don't want to believe him, you people wouldn't understand it anyway. And kew's non-stop/nonsensical bloviating about "That's NOT How LV Works!" and "He can't POSSIBLY win what he reports he does because it goes against the math!" is just him and his inexperience and envy spewing. People "win against the math" all the time, and some people DO it all the time, somehow. And you know what else? There are some who somehow continually get showered with comps as they win. You and others may not understand it, but there ARE those who have done it.

So knock off all the baloney about why you think mdawg should release his method. It would go so far over most peoples' heads that they'd just get more frustrated anyway.

And again, you have my permission to slap down that lying little twit and his "no one should have to provide proof of anything on a forum" BS....unless it's he who's doing the demanding.

Eagles moneyline.

---

Oh hush Rob. Yeah, you know your game of choice so well, that your retirement plan consists of living with and mooching off your kids. Good Grief!

Pressing bets is called a Reverse Martingale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

While the challenge was very specific, in that it was whether Dawg could have a winning session for 45 minutes or more. That served absolutely no purpose.

---

The purpose of the challenge was to win a wager, you idiot.

MDawg got sucker darkoz to pay him for doing exactly what he said that he could and would do.

We have a witnessed event, and 100% confirmation of the session report.

That's it, there's no situation to rectify.

The rest of your post is disingenuous fantasy, conjecture, speculation, ascribing motives and tasks to others, misinterpretation, and straight up putting words in other peoples' mouths.

And THAT is the entire extent of your participation in this discussion...you're wasting everyone's time with total nonsense...AGAIN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Nobody should give a flying fuck about whether someone else wins or not as just that fact alone helps nobody.

The important thing is to know what methods a person employed which led to them winning so that others could also follow suit.

For reasons one can only imagine the hound made the wiz sign an NDA prohibiting him from discussing the hound's betting methods.

Could be he just martingaled and is embarrassed to admit it, given his claims of having a photographic memory etc.

---

V, did it ever occur to you that there are certain people who understand their game of choice on a level beyond what the common AP or gambler does, and as such he or she is able to exploit that superior understanding and turn it into an unusual amount of profiting?

Most people are like you, kew, and others here. Even if mdawg were to attempt to enlighten those who simply don't want to believe him, you people wouldn't understand it anyway. And kew's non-stop/nonsensical bloviating about "That's NOT How LV Works!" and "He can't POSSIBLY win what he reports he does because it goes against the math!" is just him and his inexperience and envy spewing. People "win against the math" all the time, and some people DO it all the time, somehow. And you know what else? There are some who somehow continually get showered with comps as they win. You and others may not understand it, but there ARE those who have done it.

So knock off all the baloney about why you think mdawg should release his method. It would go so far over most peoples' heads that they'd just get more frustrated anyway.

And again, you have my permission to slap down that lying little twit and his "no one should have to provide proof of anything on a forum" BS....unless it's he who's doing the demanding.

Eagles moneyline.

---

I hate to agree with Mr. Singer, but the commonly used line by kewlJ, "That's not how the math works," is ridiculous. I say this for one definitive reason. KewlJ may know blackjack (he may not; I'm not expert enough to judge), but he definitely doesn't understand the probability of point spreads or the essence of what a pointspread actually is. Yet he blathers on as if he does while refusing to clearly acknowledge that he doesn't.

He makes the same basic grade-school error all the time -- he presumes, for no good reason, that probability theory as it pertains to random events can be applied with precision to non-random events. This is a fundamental error so obvious and egregious that it calls into question any math he applies to anything.

Now the usual reason people make this kind of error is that they are looking for excuses to gamble. They are looking for a rationale to suckle the teat of probability theory as it applies to random events and discretely swap it out for the teat of non-random events as if no one will notice. It's a basic "I'm an addict" swap. Not enough milk on the random teat? Go get some action on the non-random one. Just suckle it the same way and tell people they are the same and hope no one notices they are not.

Someone who makes this kind of error again and again and doesn't acknowledge that they are wrong has no business lecturing anyone on probability theory or "That's not how the math works." A person who does this crap has no idea how "the math" works. And I'll even give kewlJ(s) props here -- maybe he understands blackjack math. But that's it -- that's the extent of what he understands. The problem is that this isn't the extent of what he THINKS he understands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Nobody should give a flying fuck about whether someone else wins or not as just that fact alone helps nobody.

The important thing is to know what methods a person employed which led to them winning so that others could also follow suit.

For reasons one can only imagine the hound made the wiz sign an NDA prohibiting him from discussing the hound's betting methods.

Could be he just martingaled and is embarrassed to admit it, given his claims of having a photographic memory etc.

---

V, did it ever occur to you that there are certain people who understand their game of choice on a level beyond what the common AP or gambler does, and as such he or she is able to exploit that superior understanding and turn it into an unusual amount of profiting?

Most people are like you, kew, and others here. Even if mdawg were to attempt to enlighten those who simply don't want to believe him, you people wouldn't understand it anyway. And kew's non-stop/nonsensical bloviating about "That's NOT How LV Works!" and "He can't POSSIBLY win what he reports he does because it goes against the math!" is just him and his inexperience and envy spewing. People "win against the math" all the time, and some people DO it all the time, somehow. And you know what else? There are some who somehow continually get showered with comps as they win. You and others may not understand it, but there ARE those who have done it.

So knock off all the baloney about why you think mdawg should release his method. It would go so far over most peoples' heads that they'd just get more frustrated anyway.

And again, you have my permission to slap down that lying little twit and his "no one should have to provide proof of anything on a forum" BS....unless it's he who's doing the demanding.

Eagles moneyline.

---

I hate to agree with Mr. Singer, but the commonly used line by kewlJ, "That's not how the math works," is ridiculous. I say this for one definitive reason. KewlJ may know blackjack (he may not; I'm not expert enough to judge), but he definitely doesn't understand the probability of point spreads or the essence of what a pointspread actually is. Yet he blathers on as if he does while refusing to clearly acknowledge that he doesn't.

He makes the same basic grade-school error all the time -- he presumes, for no good reason, that probability theory as it pertains to random events can be applied with precision to non-random events. This is a fundamental error so obvious and egregious that it calls into question any math he applies to anything.

Now the usual reason people make this kind of error is that they are looking for excuses to gamble. They are looking for a rationale to suckle the teat of probability theory as it applies to random events and discretely swap it out for the teat of non-random events as if no one will notice. It's a basic "I'm an addict" swap. Not enough milk on the random teat? Go get some action on the non-random one. Just suckle it the same way and tell people they are the same and hope no one notices they are not.

Someone who makes this kind of error again and again and doesn't acknowledge that they are wrong has no business lecturing anyone on probability theory or "That's not how the math works." A person who does this crap has no idea how "the math" works. And I'll even give kewlJ(s) props here -- maybe he understands blackjack math. But that's it -- that's the extent of what he understands. The problem is that this isn't the extent of what he THINKS he understands.

---

What are you rambling on and on about crybaby? Something about how I don't know point spreads? :confused:

What I am doing with sports betting has NOTHING to do with point spreads. I am playing the bonus whore game and that is all. THAT is where my +EV and winning come from.

And if you want the math on that, it is this simple. I get xxx bonus, requiring xxxx rollover. If I can get through the rollover without eating away all the bonus money....I make a profit (unless the book refuses to pay my profit, which 1 has so far). That is it. That is all I am doing. Doesn't involve point spreads or middling or anything else. Just simple bonus whoring. The real truth to the matter is that what I am doing isn't even about sports betting at all.

So I don't know what you are getting yourself so worked up over?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

V, did it ever occur to you that there are certain people who understand their game of choice on a level beyond what the common AP or gambler does, and as such he or she is able to exploit that superior understanding and turn it into an unusual amount of profiting?

Most people are like you, kew, and others here. Even if mdawg were to attempt to enlighten those who simply don't want to believe him, you people wouldn't understand it anyway. And kew's non-stop/nonsensical bloviating about "That's NOT How LV Works!" and "He can't POSSIBLY win what he reports he does because it goes against the math!" is just him and his inexperience and envy spewing. People "win against the math" all the time, and some people DO it all the time, somehow. And you know what else? There are some who somehow continually get showered with comps as they win. You and others may not understand it, but there ARE those who have done it.

So knock off all the baloney about why you think mdawg should release his method. It would go so far over most peoples' heads that they'd just get more frustrated anyway.

And again, you have my permission to slap down that lying little twit and his "no one should have to provide proof of anything on a forum" BS....unless it's he who's doing the demanding.

Eagles moneyline.

---

I hate to agree with Mr. Singer, but the commonly used line by kewlJ, "That's not how the math works," is ridiculous. I say this for one definitive reason. KewlJ may know blackjack (he may not; I'm not expert enough to judge), but he definitely doesn't understand the probability of point spreads or the essence of what a pointspread actually is. Yet he blathers on as if he does while refusing to clearly acknowledge that he doesn't.

He makes the same basic grade-school error all the time -- he presumes, for no good reason, that probability theory as it pertains to random events can be applied with precision to non-random events. This is a fundamental error so obvious and egregious that it calls into question any math he applies to anything.

Now the usual reason people make this kind of error is that they are looking for excuses to gamble. They are looking for a rationale to suckle the teat of probability theory as it applies to random events and discretely swap it out for the teat of non-random events as if no one will notice. It's a basic "I'm an addict" swap. Not enough milk on the random teat? Go get some action on the non-random one. Just suckle it the same way and tell people they are the same and hope no one notices they are not.

Someone who makes this kind of error again and again and doesn't acknowledge that they are wrong has no business lecturing anyone on probability theory or "That's not how the math works." A person who does this crap has no idea how "the math" works. And I'll even give kewlJ(s) props here -- maybe he understands blackjack math. But that's it -- that's the extent of what he understands. The problem is that this isn't the extent of what he THINKS he understands.

---

What are you rambling on and on about crybaby? Something about how I don't know point spreads? :confused:

What I am doing with sports betting has NOTHING to do with point spreads. I am playing the bonus whore game and that is all. THAT is where my +EV and winning come from.

And if you want the math on that, it is this simple. I get xxx bonus, requiring xxxx rollover. If I can get through the rollover without eating away all the bonus money....I make a profit (unless the book refuses to pay my profit, which 1 has so far). That is it. That is all I am doing. Doesn't involve point spreads or middling or anything else. Just simple bonus whoring. The real truth to the matter is that what I am doing isn't even about sports betting at all.

So I don't know what you are getting yourself so worked up over?

---

Kew, I think what he's saying is just about everybody who is a no one in sports betting, like myself, has already been doing that or has done that, because most of us, like you, don't know our ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to the ins & outs of how to bet on sports consistently for a profit.

In other words, after months and months of reading about how these bonuses were easy money, you FINALLY caught on and, like a 3000 watt light bulb being flashed at you, you found yet another gambling angle to concoct into a new tale of your making some kind of profit over.

Even a caveman can see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDawg

UNKewlJ's stupidity explained: mental illness.

---

Why isn't this retard posting more fake baccarat sessions?

Redietz makes fun of things that serious professional sports bettors use all the time because it denigrates his feeling of having some sort of special sauce expertise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Redietz makes fun of things that serious professional sports bettors use all the time because it denigrates his feeling of having some sort of special sauce expertise.

---

No, redietz makes fun of people who can do A vis-a-vis sports betting and who think BECAUSE they can do only A, they are somehow superior to or on a par with people who can do A and B and C. In other words, there is literally nothing you do that a handicapper can't do.

And more importantly, go ahead, genius, explain how probability theory for random events should be applied to non-random events.

Has it occurred to you that the "secret sauce" is what's being lathered on by people who know grade school random probability theory and who somehow think they'll just slap their condiment on everything as if everything is random?

You think I'm arrogant? LOL. That's rich. I'm not the one claiming to be a "Leonardo Da AP."

You do realize there is really no such thing as "sports betting?" There is betting individual sports, and other than middles-shooting, bonusing, and arbitrage, the expertise required to bet individual sports is not some shared expertise. People who think that must also think their foot doctor makes a fine neurosurgeon.