For YOU Rob. YET ANOTHER tracking two tables player

The following quote is from a blackjack forum in the last few days of a long time card counter getting back in the game after 10 years. Please note the highlighted section about tracking two tables. What he writes is true, it becomes harder and harder every day with fewer real BJ games, replaced by carnival games and poker hybrid type games and such. Covid seems to have been a big changing point. I definitely have fewer opportunities today that pre-covid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by highrollerjw, post: 505805, member: 17585

After taking about 10 years off from serious counting while building out a business, I am back in the game as a piece of my overall investment strategy.

Starting Bankroll $25,000
Spread 1-40 units
2% ROR
6d H17 DAS

Score is about 35, but playing with no cover, in a government run establishment, they cannot back me off, or change the rules of the game for individual players.

I am playing about 5-7 hours per week on Saturday evenings. Back in the day I used to be able to back count 2 tables at a time with the way the casino was setup, but unfortunately they have drastically cut down on their tables by adding electronic betting stations and an auto shuffler and eliminating the $5 tables. The higher limit tables are now busier and they have less of them open, but the game is still very beatable.

---

This place had been dead so I salute you Kewl !

I knew a guy who could track 4 tables. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

This place had been dead so I salute you Kewl !

I knew a guy who could track 4 tables. :rolleyes:

---

To your first point, as I have been saying, this forum is mostly a troll forum now with much of the trolling directed at me and for the most part not even about issues related to gambling. So if I don't post for a few days, there is nothing for these trolls to attack. I would really like to get back to more gambling content at least mixed in with the inevitable trolling.

To your second point, tracking multiple table is much more common or at least was than these opponents (most who doesn't even play blackjack) can possibly realize. On many of the successful call in type BJ teams the spotter wasn't playing but rather tracking multiple tables 2, 3, 4 looking for that plus count, positive advantage to call the big player / big bettor into. My way of doing it is just slightly different in that rather than standing and back counting 2,3,4 tables, I am playing one and tracking a second. I have sort of combined the spotter and big player roles.

The other thing that these opponents that question this technique without knowing much about it are missing is that you don't have to track any table 100% of the time. As soon as the count goes negative you drop that table. The goal is to track a table going positive to the point that you can get Max Bets down. Any table that goes even a little bit negative early probably isn't going to get there, so you drop it.

Tracking a second table while playing one has been a big advantage booster for me for 8-10 years. You can literally see almost twice the number of max bet opportunities vs playing a single table and these max bet opportunities are really what the game is about. That is an increase in EV of well over 50% (would be more but sometime you can't get to a better count because the table is full).

Anyway as I stated unfortunately these opportunities have decreased dramatically post covid for a number of reasons, fewer real BJ games, some casinos like Stations have replaced their low limit games with electronic versions, which causes the player that used to play low limit to bump up in stakes (which is what the casino wanted), meaning more crowded tables and less availability to jump to a better count if one exits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

The following quote is from a blackjack forum in the last few days
of a long time card counter getting back in the game after 10 years.
Please note the highlighted section about tracking two tables.
Back in the day I used to be able to back count 2 tables at a time

---

He wrote that he used to back count 2 tables.

That's not what you claimed in your dispute with Alan...you claimed to track a second table while playing at a first.

That's what Alan called BS on, and considering your track record of compulsive lying, it's likely that you were lying then too.

Of course, Alan's photos, taken at the casino where you claimed to track a second table, provided convincing evidence that your claim was bogus.

When faced with that evidence, you attacked the character of the investigator, and even went so far as to use antisemitic remarks to impune his integrity.

You did all that because you are a lying scumbag, and an all-around tewl.

Wise up, asshole.

It is the exact same concept, with just a slight variation of playing both the spotter and big player role.

Must you troll every fucking thread coach belly? I have requested Druff remove you from this thread. I would prefer the entire forum as you contribute nothing but trolling, but under his own rules at least this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

It is the exact same concept

---

The back-counter can position himself so that he can see all cards on both tables.

The concept may be the same, but Alan's photos showed that it was not practical or even possible to count 2 tables at once, given the circumstances that you outlined in your claim.

Alan showed that a player at one table cannot see the cards on a second table, and he cannot track them because he is playing...not back-counting.

You essentially confirmed that your claim was bogus when you replied by calling him a shyster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I have requested Druff remove you from this thread. I would prefer the entire forum as you contribute nothing but trolling

---

I'm disputing your claim that you track a second table while playing at another table.

You prefer to censor alternate viewpoints, rather than to address or ignore them.

Of course, you have no standing to complain about trolling...nobody else even approaches your twisted, gutter level trolling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Yeah, well you seem to want Boz within an arm's length, so you can jerk him off or whatever it is you like to do to all the Jr High kids.

---

Go back and take a look at Alan's photo, proving that a player can't see the next table. :rolleyes: No reasonable person is going to agree that this intentionally blurry photo is representative of what the human eye sees. Any person not able to read the cards at the next table 6-8 feet away, probably would be declared legally blind by an eye doctor, which of course doesn't mean the person can't see, but can't see enough to meet the legal definition. And anyone (coach belly) arguing that this is proof that a player can't see the next table is as dishonest as Alan was, at least on that day. If that picture is what Alan or anyone else sees when walking through a casino, they need a seeing eye dog and cane at least, if not a person to help them get around.

https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...-Rebate/page18

Two things about your original post, KJ:

1) Why do you still a need to challenge ANY claim alan may have made, given he swears up and down he saw eighteen yo's in a row?

Such a ridiculous claim destroys credibility, so "Who cares?"

2) The poster said he's "playing with no cover, in a government run establishment, they cannot back me off, or change the rules of the game for individual players."

Huh?

What "government run establishment" is out there that allows such favorable conditions for counting?

I was unaware there's such a thing as a "government run" gambling venue.

Curious...

I tested the visual clarity question both at home at proper distances and in various casinos by sitting at the middle seat of a table and trying to see cards placed at the adjacent tables. I also measured distances in several casinos to see if there were problems with my visual acuity. Since coach is a stickler for details, I actually crouched to seating level at some of the casinos rather than sitting down in the seat. I thought that was less conspicuous some places and gave me more time to measure distances with my tape measure before being bothered by anyone.

I have bad eyes, but I was able to see cards well at most positions on most tables. Even at the worst distances, it was easy to tell paint from non-paint.

I haven't played much blackjack in 30 years, and what I can't pin down is how easy or hard this is when people are moving about at full tables. So I have suggestions for all readers:

1) Simply go into various casinos at night with a deck of cards, place the cards on adjacent empty tables at various seats, and see if you can clearly see the cards from seats at the other table. Take a tape measure and measure the distances in various casinos between seats at adjacent tables.

2) Go home and lay out tables at similar distances and re-check the clarity.

3) Get friends or family to sit down at your two home tables while "playing blackjack," and practice your ability to identify partial counts at the adjacent table.


Rather than empty debating, just go and try it. See if you can do it, and to what degree you can or cannot do it under what seating conditions. That should provide answers for anyone actually interested in this question.

I thought Alan and Andrew were going to sue the pants off of everyone???
What gives?
Sort of like the Mission146 vs coach belly Street Fight.
Nothing but disappointment after disappointment... RIP.

I'm about to come into 280k+ if anyone knows of any plays that wants to go partners.
I can't figure out the current Casino Landscape anymore.
Maybe I should just bet it all on some Hockey Game or Dan Druff pick.
Always wanted to take a quarter million and double double it to a million.
Cash!
As if I can't win two in a row... I'm due.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Two things about your original post, KJ:

1) Why do you still a need to challenge ANY claim alan may have made, given he swears up and down he saw eighteen yo's in a row?

Such a ridiculous claim destroys credibility, so "Who cares?"

2) The poster said he's "playing with no cover, in a government run establishment, they cannot back me off, or change the rules of the game for individual players."

Huh?

What "government run establishment" is out there that allows such favorable conditions for counting?

I was unaware there's such a thing as a "government run" gambling venue.

Curious...

---

To your second point....lots of casinos in other countries are run by the government. And a number of jurisdictions like Canada have rules that players can not be barred or banned for card counting. Even NJ has this. I am not specifically aware of any jurisdictions or countries that have both, but I don't really know a lot about Casinos outside the U.S.

To your first point, I didn't bring up Alan and his lack of credibility, especially on this issue. Coach Belly did. As for Alan's claim of 18 y.o in a row rendering him totally non-credible on any subject, I don't subscribe to that. I believe Alan honestly believes he saw 18 y.o.'s in a row. The mind has a way of playing tricks on you, as to what you witnessed and what you think you witnessed. Sort of selective memory. Once a person is honestly convinced that he what he saw, good luck trying to convince him otherwise. :rolleyes:

Now the math is one piece of evidence that might cause a person to re-think what they think they saw. And numerous math experts have laid out just how unlikley, I will use the word impossible what Alan is claiming occurred. But then pride enters into it and someone like Alan is just not capable of saying maybe I was wrong, in the face of all this criticism. That is my opinion on the 18 y.o. in a row. But I don't think it disqualifies everything out of Alan's mouth.

Now in gambling, extreme results DO happen. Some of them there are witnesses and accounts in the newspaper. If what Alan was claiming was true there would be such accounts.

In blackjack we have formulas involving standard deviations that tell us how extreme or unlikely our results are in each direction. Anything over 3 standard deviations is very unlikely and anything over 5 standard deviations, just about impossible. So years ago, just after I had joined BJ21, a blackjack forum with a lot of experienced players and math guys, I posted about a very negative run I had just experienced. One of the math guys fired back that those results were a one in -I forget how many million possibility. He was basically calling me a liar. Well I had just experienced it and it was a major set back at the time! Ate up a significant portion of my bankroll. Don't tell me it didn't happen and the idea that it is such an extreme long odds of happing was little consolation. I was still down a significant portion of my bankroll! :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

intentionally blurry photo

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Did you intentionally blurr the photo.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

No, my hands shake, mostly from the anti-rejection drugs I take. It's very hard for me to keep my hands steady.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I showed in the photos exactly what you didn't want me to see and confirm: the tables are too far apart so you can't read the cards on other tables. And it would be impossible if there were actually players at the other tables.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I tested the visual clarity question both at home at proper distances and in various casinos by sitting at the middle seat of a table and trying to see cards placed at the adjacent tables. I also measured distances in several casinos to see if there were problems with my visual acuity. Since coach is a stickler for details, I actually crouched to seating level at some of the casinos rather than sitting down in the seat. I thought that was less conspicuous some places and gave me more time to measure distances with my tape measure before being bothered by anyone.

I have bad eyes, but I was able to see cards well at most positions on most tables. Even at the worst distances, it was easy to tell paint from non-paint.

I haven't played much blackjack in 30 years, and what I can't pin down is how easy or hard this is when people are moving about at full tables. So I have suggestions for all readers:

1) Simply go into various casinos at night with a deck of cards, place the cards on adjacent empty tables at various seats, and see if you can clearly see the cards from seats at the other table. Take a tape measure and measure the distances in various casinos between seats at adjacent tables.

2) Go home and lay out tables at similar distances and re-check the clarity.

3) Get friends or family to sit down at your two home tables while "playing blackjack," and practice your ability to identify partial counts at the adjacent table.


Rather than empty debating, just go and try it. See if you can do it, and to what degree you can or cannot do it under what seating conditions. That should provide answers for anyone actually interested in this question.

---

There are two parts to this debate.

1) can a person see or read cards at 6 - 8 feet? That is ludicrous. Easy test. Tape a card to the wall. Step back 8 feet, 10 feet, 12 feet. If you can't see the card clearly then you really do need to visit the eye doctor. And that is before we even get into discussions about "pips and paint". You can track cards even further away by looking at pips (the little symbols correlating to the number of the card) and paint, obviously the jack, queen, King, which are all 10 value cards.

2.) the second issue is if there is a clear view. Opponents trolling me always want to leave out the key fact that I have always said "when conditions are right". They aren't always for a variety of reasons, mostly being a key seat at the second table. If that key seat is taken, conditions aren't right.

In Alan's photo which was obviously taken from the first base position (seat all the way to the right) of the adjacent table, you can see that if someone is seated at 3rd base (furthest seat to the left), of the second table being tracked, that person will be blocking the view of much of the table. However this too was an intentional mislead by Alan. I clearly stated that I sit in one of the two middle seats, which allows for a view with minimal turning of the head, usually just rolling the eyes a bit. When sitting in one of the middle seats there still is a key seat that can block but it is not 3rd base, it is the seat next to 3rd base or next to last seat.

Either way, opponents looking to argue, leave out that I always said "when conditions are right" and that in part means the key seat is unoccupied. Opponents like Alan's whose argument has been dishonest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Go back and take a look at Alan's photo. No reasonable person is going to agree that this intentionally blurry photo is representative of what the human eye sees. And anyone arguing that this is proof that a player can't see the next table is as dishonest as Alan was

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by regnis

it does seem like a pretty big stretch that he can track 2 tables without help. Alan's pictures are kind of what was in my mind's eye. Plus, as the hands are dealt at each table, it just doesn't seem feasible to accurately track both.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I can't pin down is how easy or hard this is when people are moving about at full tables. Rather than empty debating, just go and try it. See if you can do it, and to what degree you can or cannot do it under what seating conditions. That should provide answers for anyone actually interested in this question.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Yes, go do it yourself. Go look. Pick any seat you want and turn to your left or your right or look straight ahead and tell me if you can read the cards on the table.

---

Coach belly, if Alan's hands shake from anti-rejection medication, and I am sorry to hear that, but don't you think that disqualifies him and any photos he takes as representative of anything?

Either way, I ask you to look at the photo and tell me that is representative of what anyone sees? Be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

In blackjack we have formulas involving standard deviations that tell us how extreme or unlikely our results are in each direction. Anything over 3 standard deviations is very unlikely and anything over 5 standard deviations, just about impossible. So years ago, just after I had joined BJ21, a blackjack forum with a lot of experienced players and math guys, I posted about a very negative run I had just experienced.

---

I wonder what the standard deviation would be for 18 yo's in a row?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I ask you to look at the photo and tell me that is representative of what anyone sees? Be honest.

---

Of course it is representative of what anyone sees, it's a photo that shows the distance and angle of the adjoining table.

It doesn't matter that the adjoining table felt is not in focus, you can still see the distance and angle.

We can see that an empty chairback partially obstructs the view of the adjoining felt, and it's reasonable and honest to conclude that persons occupying the seats would totally obstruct the view from any adjoining table.

This thread was worth a stop.

I also attempted to "read card values" at a casino where there were no patrons. It was at Peppermill Reno with a floor manager I know thru friends. He became interested when I told him about a card counter's claim. He said casinos have known about the claimed tactic for years, and it is summarily dismissed. He showed me why. He also explained that someone playing one table could never get an accurate enuf count going at another table and even if the player could, it would come at a cost to the game he's actually playing.

First, even with empty tables overnight with no one walking by or around the two tables and at any seat, less than half the values could be determined at the next table. Add in player and others' movements and the effort becomes administrative chaos. He also said that a normal stealthy counter easily presents tells to casino personnel when their head is constantly bopping back & forth to the next table.

He said it's a senseless claim because all it does is reduce theoretical advantage and puts the player at greater risk of being asked to leave.

Regardless, my primary comment had to do with KEW making this claim. You can see his insatiable constant need to garner forum attention. You should also again be able to comprehend that he has neither the temperament, wherewithal, or especially discipline to be able to do most of these things that he reads about on forums and in books. Someone as desperately seeking relevance as he does would sweat too much in scenarios such as this.

It is funny, Rob always has some unnamed "expert" that backs up his thoughts. Often a sockpuppet like Girlfriday the real estate agent claiming no advantage player could get a mortgage. :D

Rob you have stated numerous times that you don't play blackjack. If I recall you used the words not my game. Well, allow me to inform you that as any blackjack player, forget, card counter or AP but any blackjack player will attest there are a frequent number of table hoppers, especially at locations like Vegas (exception weekends) that are not particularly crowded. Most players despise these table hoppers because they think they disrupt the game and flow of card and that sort of thing, but they are simply implementing one of the key voodoo type superstition behavior of your typical -EV player, chasing "hot tables and dealers" and running from "cold tables and dealers". Casinos love these kind of superstitious players. Admittedly pit folks might not as for rated players it means more work transferring them. I of course, play unrated, eliminating that.

And yes, I always mutter something about my current dealer being too hot or sometimes say something about having won with the dealer at the next table yesterday or something to that effect. My favorite is when I have won 3 or 4 hands in a row, see a favorable situation at the next table and want to jump, I wait until I lose a hand and say "you are too hot for me". :D

Rob, You don't play blackjack and have demonstrated zero knowledge of the game and particularly playing with an advantage, so again, I recommend you stay in your lane. Keep your trolling and stupid statements about something you know at least a little bit about, please.

As for your second point, specifically about me. What you are basically saying is Yes, these things can be done, but you don't believe I can do them. THAT is simply your hate shining through. You are consumed with hate, to the point that it effects your common sense.

Here is the thing about tracking a second table:

Any successful player today, with today's conditions and higher house edges by rules like H17, quickly realizes that the "play all" approach of yesteryear, meaning playing through all counts, isn't going to cut it. Play all approach today requires a huge bet spread, aggressive bet ramp, and huge variance to get just a small edge.

So successful players adopt some version of escaping at lease some of the negative counts. Everything from bathroom breaks to pretend phone calls, just sitting out if the casino will allow it. For some players, myself included, negative counts is a trigger to find a new game.

So once a player adopts that mentality, exiting negative counts to find a new game, the next logical step is to start looking for that next game or opportunity even before that exit trigger has come. I mean if you are going to exit one game because the count is negative and join another table in progress without knowing any information about the count, then don't you think ANY information you have as to that second table and count is beneficial? This includes partial counts etc.

Anyone arguing partial counts provide no advantage should look into Standford Wong's (among others) extensive work on the subject. OR you can just troll and make statements you know nothing about. :rolleyes:

Another 2 table debate???

https://youtu.be/DHbT6BjFvcA

Damn J, BlackjackDegen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Here is the thing about tracking a second table:

Any successful player today, with today's conditions and higher house edges by rules like H17, quickly realizes that the "play all" approach of yesteryear, meaning playing through all counts, isn't going to cut it. Play all approach today requires a huge bet spread, aggressive bet ramp, and huge variance to get just a small edge.

So successful players adopt some version of escaping at lease some of the negative counts. Everything from bathroom breaks to pretend phone calls, just sitting out if the casino will allow it. For some players, myself included, negative counts is a trigger to find a new game.

So once a player adopts that mentality, exiting negative counts to find a new game, the next logical step is to start looking for that next game or opportunity even before that exit trigger has come. I mean if you are going to exit one game because the count is negative and join another table in progress without knowing any information about the count, then don't you think ANY information you have as to that second table and count is beneficial? This includes partial counts etc.

Anyone arguing partial counts provide no advantage should look into Standford Wong's (among others) extensive work on the subject. OR you can just troll and make statements you know nothing about. :rolleyes:

---

Kew, for someone who lives a concocted online forum life, you're remarkably ineffective when it comes time to back up your attention-craving bullshit.

Did you see how you needed to post two extended diatribes as soon as your diminished credibility surrounding counting 2 tables got totally squashed....and by someone who never plays the game, no less! You go on and on about irrelevant issues, then when you FINALLY realize your nonsensical points aren't making it pass the sniff test, you attack the provider.

IF I were you I'd stop reading those forums. When you post that stuff here as if you own it, all you do is humiliate yourself further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Another 2 table debate???

---

Not really much of a debate, as I am sure you know jbjb. You have a handful of people who have absolutely zero blackjack experience or knowledge, Rob and Alan among them, that want to insist that a person can't track more than one table simultaneously, when numerous successful players have done so, including the basis for an entire team approach, the "call-in" implemented by many successful players and teams.

To counter that, opponents want to draw a distinction between back-counting multiple table and playing one while tracking a second, when there is no distinction. Are there not people, both players with their backs to the spotters as well as people walking through the casino that may cause a back-counting spotter to missed card or two? Absolutely. It all comes down to "partial" counts, which can still identify an advantage and the key phrase "when able to".

Much less a debate than an attempt to troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozzy

Damn J, BlackjackDegen.

---

Why would you use the term "degen". I guess an attempt to degrade me, as you always do. A degenerate in gambling terms is someone who can't control their gambling, plays a losing game....loses, usually effecting their life financially (unable to pay bills, relationship deteriorate ect).

I am a professional blackjack player, in my 19th year of supporting myself from blackjack advantage play and a bit of non-blackjack advantage play (but mostly blackjack related), who has earned more than 1.6 million dollars doing so. Show me how that fits into any definition of degenerate in terms of gambling?

Now if you want to use some terminology saying I am obsessed with blackjack card counting advantage play....fine. It has been my life, for 19 years, nearly all of my adult life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Kew, for someone who lives a concocted online forum life, you're remarkably ineffective when it comes time to back up your attention-craving bullshit.

Did you see how you needed to post two extended diatribes as soon as your diminished credibility surrounding counting 2 tables got totally squashed....and by someone who never plays the game, no less! You go on and on about irrelevant issues, then when you FINALLY realize your nonsensical points aren't making it pass the sniff test, you attack the provider.

IF I were you I'd stop reading those forums. When you post that stuff here as if you own it, all you do is humiliate yourself further.

---

YES Rob! acknowledged. You are a much better troll than me. Congratulations! That is not my purpose, although admittedly, I have been drug into the mud responding to you trolls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Another 2 table debate???

---

Not really much of a debate, as I am sure you know jbjb. You have a handful of people who have absolutely zero blackjack experience or knowledge, Rob and Alan among them, that want to insist that a person can't track more than one table simultaneously, when numerous successful players have done so, including the basis for an entire team approach, the "call-in" implemented by many successful players and teams.

To counter that, opponents want to draw a distinction between back-counting multiple table and playing one while tracking a second, when there is no distinction. Are there not people, both players with their backs to the spotters as well as people walking through the casino that may cause a back-counting spotter to missed card or two? Absolutely. It all comes down to "partial" counts, which can still identify an advantage and the key phrase "when able to".

Much less a debate than an attempt to troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozzy

Damn J, BlackjackDegen.

---

Why would you use the term "degen". I guess an attempt to degrade me, as you always do. A degenerate in gambling terms is someone who can't control their gambling, plays a losing game....loses, usually effecting their life financially (unable to pay bills, relationship deteriorate ect).

I am a professional blackjack player, in my 19th year of supporting myself from blackjack advantage play and a bit of non-blackjack advantage play (but mostly blackjack related), who has earned more than 1.6 million dollars doing so. Show me how that fits into any definition of degenerate in terms of gambling?

Now if you want to use some terminology saying I am obsessed with blackjack card counting advantage play....fine. It has been my life, for 19 years, nearly all of my adult life.

---

It's a joke that a couple might get, one in particular. I thought you would interpret it that way though, not surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Here is the thing about tracking a second table:

Any successful player today, with today's conditions and higher house edges by rules like H17, quickly realizes that the "play all" approach of yesteryear, meaning playing through all counts, isn't going to cut it. Play all approach today requires a huge bet spread, aggressive bet ramp, and huge variance to get just a small edge.

So successful players adopt some version of escaping at lease some of the negative counts. Everything from bathroom breaks to pretend phone calls, just sitting out if the casino will allow it. For some players, myself included, negative counts is a trigger to find a new game.

So once a player adopts that mentality, exiting negative counts to find a new game, the next logical step is to start looking for that next game or opportunity even before that exit trigger has come. I mean if you are going to exit one game because the count is negative and join another table in progress without knowing any information about the count, then don't you think ANY information you have as to that second table and count is beneficial? This includes partial counts etc.

Anyone arguing partial counts provide no advantage should look into Standford Wong's (among others) extensive work on the subject. OR you can just troll and make statements you know nothing about. :rolleyes:

---

Kew, for someone who lives a concocted online forum life, you're remarkably ineffective when it comes time to back up your attention-craving bullshit.

Did you see how you needed to post two extended diatribes as soon as your diminished credibility surrounding counting 2 tables got totally squashed....and by someone who never plays the game, no less! You go on and on about irrelevant issues, then when you FINALLY realize your nonsensical points aren't making it pass the sniff test, you attack the provider.

IF I were you I'd stop reading those forums. When you post that stuff here as if you own it, all you do is humiliate yourself further.

---

If he were to do that Rob, you would lose to Mickey for the race to 10k. You're in the drivers seat right now. Mickey has lost steam lately, since I started my thread a few weeks ago. You are not nearly as diverse as he is, you're a one trick pony ! :)

We really need some new shit to argue about...RIP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozzy

Damn J, BlackjackDegen.

---

Why would you use the term "degen". I guess an attempt to degrade me, as you always do. A degenerate in gambling terms is someone who can't control their gambling, plays a losing game....loses, usually effecting their life financially (unable to pay bills, relationship deteriorate ect).

I am a professional blackjack player, in my 19th year of supporting myself from blackjack advantage play and a bit of non-blackjack advantage play (but mostly blackjack related), who has earned more than 1.6 million dollars doing so. Show me how that fits into any definition of degenerate in terms of gambling?

Now if you want to use some terminology saying I am obsessed with blackjack card counting advantage play....fine. It has been my life, for 19 years, nearly all of my adult life.

---

Did you literally just state that you spent 19 years inside Casinos at Blackjack tables and tell everyone you are not a degenerate???
As if normal honest upright citizens do this sort of thing lol.
You are delusional.
Just admit that you are a low life degenerate like the rest of us.
Counting Multiple Tables at Blackjack for living and thinking you are not a degenerate lol... RIP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozzy

Damn J, BlackjackDegen.

---

Why would you use the term "degen". I guess an attempt to degrade me, as you always do. A degenerate in gambling terms is someone who can't control their gambling, plays a losing game....loses, usually effecting their life financially (unable to pay bills, relationship deteriorate ect).

I am a professional blackjack player, in my 19th year of supporting myself from blackjack advantage play and a bit of non-blackjack advantage play (but mostly blackjack related), who has earned more than 1.6 million dollars doing so. Show me how that fits into any definition of degenerate in terms of gambling?

Now if you want to use some terminology saying I am obsessed with blackjack card counting advantage play....fine. It has been my life, for 19 years, nearly all of my adult life.

---

Did you literally just state that you spent 19 years inside Casinos at Blackjack tables and tell everyone you are not a degenerate???
As if normal honest upright citizens do this sort of thing lol.
You are delusional.
Just admit that you are a low life degenerate like the rest of us.
Counting Multiple Tables at Blackjack for living and thinking you are not a degenerate lol... RIP.

---

I guess Walmart workers are degenerates at going to Walmart then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

I guess Walmart workers are degenerates at going to Walmart then.

---

Your analogy makes no sense.
No reason to argue about it with you.
You only believe in Science.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

We really need some new shit to argue about...RIP

---

I agree, I'm trying my best but can only produce so much :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

I guess Walmart workers are degenerates at going to Walmart then.

---

Your analogy makes no sense.
No reason to argue about it with you.
You only believe in Science.

---

Makes perfect sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

Did you literally just state that you spent 19 years inside Casinos at Blackjack tables and tell everyone you are not a degenerate???
As if normal honest upright citizens do this sort of thing lol.
You are delusional.
Just admit that you are a low life degenerate like the rest of us.
Counting Multiple Tables at Blackjack for living and thinking you are not a degenerate lol... RIP.

---

I play blackjack for a living monet, That is far different than some losing player spending every day at a casino or horse track.

In term of gambling or in gambling circle, the term "degenerate" refers to 1) losing players and 2) players that gamble more than they can afford to which effects their life, finances, relationships, sometimes even ability to hold a job or place to live neither of these definitions applies to me. I am a guy that makes a living at the blackjack tables. Would you call the dealer or pit guy that spends nearly every day making a living in a casino a degenerate? How about a bartender, cocktail waitress, or any other job that requires a person to be in the casino?

You are always so desperate to put some kind of negative spin on everyone. You look for and see the worst in people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

No reason to argue about it with you.You only believe in Science.

---

Better than believing that there really is a lady luck, santa, easter bunny and tooth fairy, aka omniscient beings, aka god.

How's that worked out for you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Kew, for someone who lives a concocted online forum life, you're remarkably ineffective when it comes time to back up your attention-craving bullshit.

Did you see how you needed to post two extended diatribes as soon as your diminished credibility surrounding counting 2 tables got totally squashed....and by someone who never plays the game, no less! You go on and on about irrelevant issues, then when you FINALLY realize your nonsensical points aren't making it pass the sniff test, you attack the provider.

IF I were you I'd stop reading those forums. When you post that stuff here as if you own it, all you do is humiliate yourself further.

---

YES Rob! acknowledged. You are a much better troll than me. Congratulations! That is not my purpose, although admittedly, I have been drug into the mud responding to you trolls.

---

KJ has been the number one troll on VCT for at least a couple of years now. The sheer volume of his troll posts far outnumbers those of others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Makes perfect sense to me.

---

After a little more consideration I concede to the fact that your statement makes sense.
The point is that kewlJ is completely a degenerate but has delusions of grandeur.