The Mdawg "challenge"

I know some of you aren't keeping up to date with the soap opera of Mdawg, so I thought I would bring you up to date. Your welcome. :p

For the last six months the Mdawg person has included a challenge or financial wager to anyone challenging his claims, which he used as his signature line so that it appeared in each of his hundreds of posts. In it he stated he and the challenger could figure a way to prove his claims to the challenger's satisfaction.

So in the aftermath of this Mdawgs recent escalating claims involving a nearly quarter million dollar win in one session, a challenger did come forward. He didn't want to make himself known for obvious reasons, so he worked through Shackleford to find out if his terms would be agreed to. Remember this was supposed to be proven to the challenger's satisfaction. Well guess what they weren't. This challenger had a way to prove without a doubt and Mdawg could not, would not agree.

And low and behold Mdawg's "challenge" signature rather quietly has disappeared. :rolleyes: I find it rather interesting that when this Mdawg character reneges on something or rolls back a lie, it is done rather quietly as opposed to all the bluster of his claims and such. Case in point would be last fall, when after claiming to have won almost every day for months and months, to the tune of over half million dollars, the "correction" was a single line at the end of a long post that read: "additionally, Wizard and I went over my records for this trip, and I am about even". $500k to about even....no big deal. And Shackleford oddly praised him for his honesty. :confused: What a scam these TWO are perpetrating. :D

I blocked douchedawg long ago so his inane posts no longer pollute my vision.

Seems to me that he and Rob are alike in that both have made outlandish, bullshit claims, but they differ in that I laugh at Rob's but groan and want to throw rotten fruit at douchedawg's.

He gives a bad name to lawyers, if such a thing is possible.

Now after that "minor" correction last fall where he rolled back months and months of claims of winning totaling over 500k, to "about even", with one short line, this Mdawg character started all over again, claiming winning, winning, winning, which after this latest escalation claim of nearly a quarter million dollars puts him close to a million dollars ahead since that "rollback: last fall.

Big picture: since last March, excluding two breaks totaling a couple weeks that he returned to California, this Mdawg person claims to have lived in Vegas for 16 months now (or 15 of 16 months) in comped suites, while winning a million dollars. Seriously, I ask anyone...is this the way Las Vegas works? :rolleyes:

Now here is the thing. Everything about this person's claims fits, if you change one thing....all the winning. If he is a losing player, playing higher stakes, everything falls into place, all the comped suites, and other high end comps, the private tables, all the high priced meals he shows up to try to impress, everything falls into place. Switch winning player to losing player and this is exactly the way Las Vegas works! This dude is just conveniently leaving out all his losing days and sessions and only telling us about the winning days.

No one doubts he is a rich dude that can afford his play and losses to receive the comps he gets. It is just so fucked up that he wants and needs to pretend that he is a winning player to boot. :confused:

And one more odd thing: This Mdawg person claims to have a wife or girlfriend (I think girlfriend) accompanying him. The female companion doesn't gamble according to Mdawg. So what has she done in Vegas for the last 16 months? Shop and visit the spa, according to Mdawg. Really? 16 months? 16 months away from her friends in California? Small detail, but just another piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Now after that "minor" correction last fall where he rolled back months and months of claims of winning totaling over 500k, to "about even", with one short line, this Mdawg character started all over again, claiming winning, winning, winning, which after this latest escalation claim of nearly a quarter million dollars puts him close to a million dollars ahead since that "rollback: last fall.

Big picture: since last March, excluding two breaks totaling a couple weeks that he returned to California, this Mdawg person claims to have lived in Vegas for 16 months now (or 15 of 16 months) in comped suites, while winning a million dollars. Seriously, I ask anyone...is this the way Las Vegas works? :rolleyes:

Now here is the thing. Everything about this person's claims fits, if you change one thing....all the winning. If he is a losing player, playing higher stakes, everything falls into place, all the comped suites, and other high end comps, the private tables, all the high priced meals he shows up to try to impress, everything falls into place. Switch winning player to losing player and this is exactly the way Las Vegas works! This dude is just conveniently leaving out all his losing days and sessions and only telling us about the winning days.

No one doubts he is a rich dude that can afford his play and losses to receive the comps he gets. It is just so fucked up that he wants and needs to pretend that he is a winning player to boot. :confused:

---

Once again you show how stupid you are.

I don’t care or know if mdawg is winning.

But people who understand advantage play something a fake like you does not can get comped at Madawgs level for as long as they want

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

But people who understand advantage play something a fake like you does not can get comped at Madawgs level for as long as they want

---

No sir, they can NOT! This isn't machine play and your multi-card tricks. What this person is claiming is very high end table game play at a high end casino, in the high limit area, at a private table.

Under these conditions that he is claiming there are probably several pit along with a surveillance tech watching JUST him. There is no rat-holing or other methods of hiding anything. Even if a player did some of this, at a private table it is a matter of counting the rack before and after he plays. They will know exactly, what he has won or lost.

If you would take your "hate KJ" hat off and show just a little objectivity, you would know that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

But people who understand advantage play something a fake like you does not can get comped at Madawgs level for as long as they want

---

No sir, they can NOT! This isn't machine play and your multi-card tricks. What this person is claiming is very high end table game play at a high end casino, in the high limit area, at a private table.

Under these conditions that he is claiming there are probably several pit along with a surveillance tech watching JUST him. There is no rat-holing or other methods of hiding anything. Even if a player did some of this, at a private table it is a matter of counting the rack before and after he plays. They will know exactly, what he has won or lost.

If you would take your "hate KJ" hat off and show just a little objectivity, you would know that.

---

You didn’t say this gunzzzzz you made a general statement that it’s impossible without losing. There’s ways to do it on tables as well. I ran a baccarat play for a few years in Vegas. Three to four people it was a simple play and the casinos there eventually implement a simple solution to stop us.

On a side note I can’t wait for this to happen to me.

“. When these people come crumbling down and are completely exposed for the fraud that they are, as recently happened with the guy who posts as Rob Singer, you just look like a bigger idiot (and less credible for anything you have claimed) because you hitched your star to their wagon”


You know since I’m a fraud lol

Only fraud is you bro .

Keep practicing that pool strut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

“. When these people come crumbling down and are completely exposed for the fraud that they are, as recently happened with the guy who posts as Rob Singer, you just look like a bigger idiot (and less credible for anything you have claimed) because you hitched your star to their wagon”


You know since I’m a fraud lol

---

Where did I say you were a fraud? I said you were a scammer. :D And that was based on info that you were JWT, which you claim not to be and Dan Druff has confirmed. So I apologize for that, for about the 4th time.

As to who you are, I don't know, nor much care. You claim to be, and I have no reason to doubt you are doing advantage plays much above my pay grade. Good for you. Most AP's are above my pay grade. :D

You seem to want to go to war and have gotten nasty and personal attacking my sexuality, when there is no real need. I have no issue with you, at least at the moment. If you want to claim things that are impossible like Singer or Mdawg, then maybe we can talk. Otherwise, just calm down and have a good 4th. Have a hot dog and burger on the grill and a few beers or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

“. When these people come crumbling down and are completely exposed for the fraud that they are, as recently happened with the guy who posts as Rob Singer, you just look like a bigger idiot (and less credible for anything you have claimed) because you hitched your star to their wagon”


You know since I’m a fraud lol

---

Where did I say you were a fraud? I said you were a scammer. :D And that was based on info that you were JWT, which you claim not to be and Dan Druff has confirmed. So I apologize for that, for about the 4th time.

As to who you are, I don't know, nor much care. You claim to be, and I have no reason to doubt you are doing advantage plays much above my pay grade. Good for you. Most AP's are above my pay grade. :D

You seem to want to go to war and have gotten nasty and personal attacking my sexuality, when there is no real need. I have no issue with you, at least at the moment. If you want to claim things that are impossible like Singer or Mdawg, then maybe we can talk. Otherwise, just calm down and have a good 4th. Have a hot dog and burger on the grill and a few beers or something.

---

Here a simple online advantage play.

Just mentioning someone’s online handle in conjunction with certain words or phrases enough that person will be investigated by certain Three letter government organizations.

Creating multiple burner accounts across different social platforms and doing this would accomplish the goal.

Suddenly that person in real life ends up on a no fly list.

So keep dreaming kewlJ about shooting up people in casinos that disagree with your political beliefs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Have a hot dog and burger on the grill and a few beers or something.

---

As for that "something, I'd prescribe a triple-play for your pipe: blend in leaf, kief and wax.

Ahhh, just what the doctor ordered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

“. When these people come crumbling down and are completely exposed for the fraud that they are, as recently happened with the guy who posts as Rob Singer, you just look like a bigger idiot (and less credible for anything you have claimed) because you hitched your star to their wagon”


You know since I’m a fraud lol

---

Where did I say you were a fraud? I said you were a scammer. :D And that was based on info that you were JWT, which you claim not to be and Dan Druff has confirmed. So I apologize for that, for about the 4th time.

As to who you are, I don't know, nor much care. You claim to be, and I have no reason to doubt you are doing advantage plays much above my pay grade. Good for you. Most AP's are above my pay grade. :D

You seem to want to go to war and have gotten nasty and personal attacking my sexuality, when there is no real need. I have no issue with you, at least at the moment. If you want to claim things that are impossible like Singer or Mdawg, then maybe we can talk. Otherwise, just calm down and have a good 4th. Have a hot dog and burger on the grill and a few beers or something.

---

Here a simple online advantage play.

Just mentioning someone’s online handle in conjunction with certain words or phrases enough that person will be investigated by certain Three letter government organizations.

Creating multiple burner accounts across different social platforms and doing this would accomplish the goal.

Suddenly that person in real life ends up on a no fly list.

So keep dreaming kewlJ about shooting up people in casinos that disagree with your political beliefs

---

I also don’t care who you suck or fuck

I’ve explained my girl loves doming sissy boys. I’m a swinger I don’t care about your gayness or if you pluck the hairs from your star.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Have a hot dog and burger on the grill and a few beers or something.

---

As for that "something, I'd prescribe a triple-play for your pipe: blend in leaf, kief and wax.

Ahhh, just what the doctor ordered.

---

What’s your cup size now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcap

What’s your cup size now?

---

Standard size coffee cup, just right for the Keurig; why do you ask?

Oh wait a minute, I get it ... you were trying to be a mixture of insulting and humorous.

Epic fail, try again.

@KJ and Seedvalue

Get a room all ready!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

And one more odd thing: This Mdawg person claims to have a wife or girlfriend (I think girlfriend) accompanying him. The female companion doesn't gamble according to Mdawg. So what has she done in Vegas for the last 16 months? Shop and visit the spa, according to Mdawg. Really? 16 months? 16 months away from her friends in California? Small detail, but just another piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit. :cool:

---

I would have a comment that would make sense in multiple ways about spending her time hanging out with someone who seems to be a pervert, but that’s not fair to her since she really isn’t claiming anything. Then again the MDawg persona doesn’t seem like a cuck. His claims make it seem he is more the stud that would be doing another guys wife while the guy enjoys being the cuck.

Seed probably knows a lot more about this than I do. This entire KJ is a escort, Seed is a swinger is way out of my league. I don’t even understand why they dislike each other, other than the slight that he apologized for multiple times. And is something that guy this thread is about was involved in promoting.

Seed obviously was "short-changed" by mother nature so he constructed this fantasy to take his mind off how shitty his life really is.

It seems to be a common tale, told through the centuries by others in the same sad boat.

I followed the MDAWG drama when he first appeared over on WOV fairly regularly, however like most in the past year or so will occasionally take a look at the thread.

First of all, I am almost certain there will be no terms that are agreed to between MDAWG and a potential challenger. This is for a number of reason I can get into on another post.

My advice to a potential challenger:

As you know, MDAWG doesn’t give the exact date of his sessions. This is a huge problem to a potential challenger. At the bottom of his post for the longest time it read:
“If any one doubts that any one, just any one of the session reports I present during this trip is not accurate, throw down the red flag!”

So basically he is wanting a challenge for just one single session. There are so many issues with this. However, for now I will just stick to this and in later post I will suggest the best ways I think it should be done.

In his current “sessions” he is on day #49 as of July 3rd. His first post (#1) in this session was posted on approximately May 7th. So roughly 47 sessions in 57 days. MDAWG has stated for privacy reasons theses sessions are in no particular order and they can span anywhere in that 57 days. This creates a HUGE problem for the challenger.

Let’s take for example “Day #38” which was posted on June 12th. A win of $16,800 was claimed. This actual playing session could have happened anywhere from May 7th to June 12th. Actually it’s likley it may have even happened before that date. But let’s go with the earliest date of May 7th. So this is a span of roughly 36 days that MDAWG could have “won”’ the $16,800.

Now if MDAWG was challenged on “Day #38”. He can “pull” from at least 36 days of play and any one of the casinos he has played at to get an amount close to 16.8k. So for example, on May 20th let’s say he had a win at “Ceasars” for 27k. Later in the day he plays at Cosmo and lossed 10.2k for a net total of +16.8k. Now, obviously with a challenge there would have to be some flexibility in the actual amount won or loss due to tips, casino personnel slightly over reporting or under reporting the amount won/loss. I think an agreement of 20% over or under for the session total is reasonable. So if we use “Day 38” as an example. The claim was up $16.8k. A 20% shortage would be $13,440. A 20% overage is $20,160. What this means is he would only have to find a day with a “net win” from $13,440 to $20,160 during a 36 day span.



Shit, it just erased about 50% of what I wrote, I will retype and post below....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

This entire KJ is a escort,

---

Boz, it offends and disappoints me that you would even repeat this. :( I am no more a male escort that you are.

A common tactic of these troll types is to make up and repeat a lie hundreds of times. the theory is that if you repeat the lie often enough it becomes accepted as fact. Please Boz, don't help him by repeating this lie.

I have been on half dozen gambling forums for 16 years. I am on them because my life is blackjack and gambling (although I don't consider it gambling). It is what I do for a living. I mean who ever heard of a male escort or even female escort scouring gambling forums looking for "clients". Stupidest thing I have heard because most/many on gambling forums are gamblers who have lost their disposable money, right?

This guy seedvalue is a clown making up lies and you should know they are lies because he has these secret people that he won't reveal that can verify his nonsense. Please Boz, don't give this nut job the oxygen he is seeking with this nonsense.

And as for his "swinger" status....yuk! Who cares? Do You? I sure as hell don't. I thought "swingers" were something that died in the 70's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

This entire KJ is a escort,

---

Boz, it offends and disappoints me that you would even repeat this. :( I am no more a male escort that you are.
.

---

How do know I’m not? Maybe I made up that entire worked hard and owned a business stuff. 😀

Maybe it’s all a (very) long con on my end to get Tasha or Nathan on a date and take him/her for all their money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

How do know I’m not? Maybe I made up that entire worked hard and owned a business stuff. ��

Maybe it’s all a (very) long con on my end to get Tasha or Nathan on a date and take him/her for all their money.

---

Well which is it you want to get to....Tasha or Nathan? That says some about you right there. ;)

Seriously, I have said many times it just doesn't take that much to figure out who is who, who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking. I may be the lower end of the AP universe, maybe I am the absolute bottom, the very, very bottom, I don't know. #303 in a high school class of 303 type thing. But anyone with half a brain and even a little bit of objectivity, should know what I am and know what I am talking about in my narrow field or lane. Anyone who doesn't is someone that doesn't want to know and can't accept the truth. People like Singer and Mdawg, coach belly, for a long time Moses (I don't know what he would say now) and now this seedvalue, who has already revealed he creates many identities on forums.

Find me one, real, normal member of these forums, who isn't just trolling, who hasn't figured out what is what, and I will be surprised. And don't give me Garnabby. I said "normal".

Continued...



Let’s say during this time period MDAWG has played at 7 casinos. He would have 7 casinos to “pull numbers from”. So he would be able to pull from this group of casinos. Its possible that he has something like the following I listed below for a single days play. Let’s say it’s day #31, posted June 12th for a “win of $16.8k”.

Example:
Casino #1 loss 15.5k
Casino #2 won 27k
Casino #3 did not play
Casino #4 loss 10.2k
Casino #5 did not play
Casino #6 loss 5k
Casino #7 did not play

So as you can see by the above example, he would have lost $3,700 on the day. However, let’s say 2 of the casinos are NOT mentioned, when he gives the challenger his results for that specific day. It would APPEAR he won $16.8k which would appear to meet “day #31’s” results.

MY ADVICE TO A CHALLENGER:

The following information must be sent to a 3rd party such as Wizard PRIOR to the challenge. (Actually after I got to thinking about it, the challenger needs to be sent this info as well. There will be specifics as what needs to be challenged).

1. PRIOR to the challenge taking place, a list of every “day” that was posted in the thread must be linked to the ACTUAL Calendar day that the wagers took place. For example “Day 31” was posted on June 12th, but the actual day was May 10th.

2. All casinos that had a win/loss/ break even in ANY of the session totals must be listed.

3.The exact dollar amount won for each day along with each casino played at, as well as the dollar amount won or lost at that casino must be listed.


If all of this is NOT done, MDAWG would easily be able to pick from a list of days along with “cherry pick” from the list of casinos to come to the amount listed for the specific day challenged.

Without an actual list of casinos played at, it would be impossible to conduct this challenge.

Also, remember, if MDAWG accepts the challenge. It’s likely he has the numbers in line to win. Think about it, why else would he move forward with it?


So, a challenge would need to be more than a single days session. Ideally it would need to cover a significant period of time.

An ideal challenge would be something like, “Did MDAWG win more than $100,000 from May 1st 2022 to June 1st 2022, at these 7 casinos?(list casinos)” There are to many issues with a challenge for a single day.

If someone is really interested in challenging MDAWG, PM me and I will give you a good way to conduct the challenge for both sides (MDAWG and Challenger) to where it is fair.

Got a lot of this post deleted. Don’t want to retype it all, but I think I
got my point across...

Nice PositiveVariance! This is a rather detailed explanation of what I have been saying all along. He is only reporting or mostly reporting his wins and not all his losses.

All I can say is get ready, because he will soon be calling you every name in the book at other forums. ;)

Last year the guy was staying at Cosmo mostly and playing Cosmo mostly, with occasional play at Wynn/Encore and a very little bit at Resorts World when they opened last summer. But the vast majority of his play was at Cosmo.

I think it really threw him for a loop when I got a hold of some records that showed he was 100k in the red at Cosmo when all his winning claims had him up 500K. That forced that one line retraction of being "about even". He absolutely hated that someone could find his actual play records. And that is when he really began to spread his play out. I think he is now staying and playing at both Ceasars and Cosmo, along with Wynn/Encore, Resorts World, plus has mentioned playing other places like Red Rock.

Like I said that really threw him for a loop. :cool: So now if someone gets a hold of some records, he can say, "yeah but that is only one place. I have greater winnings elsewhere".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Nice PositiveVariance! This is a rather detailed explanation of what I have been saying all along. he is only reporting or mostly reporting his wins and not all his losses.

All I can say is get ready, because he will soon be calling you every name in the book at other forums. ;)

---

This would be the best way to conduct a challenge:
Play a certain number of shoes. I say at the minimum of 20. Ideally around 50 shoes. Set a minimum and maximum bet so martingale couldn’t be used near the end out of desperation to catch up. obviously the more shoes the better to get through variance. Obviously the challenger would view the live play.

KJ, So the session that Wizard witnessed, the one DarkOz put up $2,000, is it believed variance was on his side that session or was there something else going on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PositiveVariance

KJ, So the session that Wizard witnessed, the one DarkOz put up $2,000, is it believed variance was on his side that session or was there something else going on?

---

Well, yes and no. That one, very small sample size of a session was not going to prove anything as far as whether Mdawg could win constantly as he claimed. It was a silly wager and I have no idea why darkoz made it or what he was intending to prove.

But the wager was set up in such a way that all Mdawg had to do was win a small amount and he won the wager.

So I believe he set up his play betting small at first and if he got ahead, just milking it until the end and he would win. If he fell behind early he was prepared to bet more (progressive wagering) whether martingale, or some other progressive amount until he won one of the larger bets and was ahead and then he would go back to milking it until he won.

It is my understanding he never fell behind, that he did win early and milked it for a small win. Much smaller amount than he had been reporting at the time.

AND that is exactly why he made Wizard agree to a non-disclosure agreement. If it had been necessary for Mdawg to start betting progressively, Wizard would have immediately known this and reported it. Mdawg didn't want that. So he silenced Wizard.

So yeah, he had good positive variance (like your name) and didn't need to do anything else but milk that for a small win. But he was prepared to martingale or other progressive bet if need be, which would have given him the best chance to finish ahead for a small meaningless sample size like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Seed obviously was "short-changed" by mother nature so he constructed this fantasy to take his mind off how shitty his life really is.

It seems to be a common tale, told through the centuries by others in the same sad boat.

---

Yawn

But still not willing to bet dick head to dick head measurements

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

But still not willing to bet dick head to dick head measurements

---

Dude, I yield to you; no question, you are THE "dick head" on this forum.

I hope I am not stepping on anyone's toes here that shared information with me, but I am now aware of two different well respected members, here and at least one also at WoV, that were preparing to take Mdawg up on this challenge that has been his signature line at WoV for nearly a year. Both were negotiating through Shackleford the terms of this challenge.

So all of the sudden a couple days ago Mdawg abruptly announced the end of his current Las Vegas stay and trip. This is significant because the terms of his challenge signature (which has now been removed) state "during his current trip".

So with not one but two challengers, who both would have likely been able to prove his claims false, he pulls the rug out by abruptly ending the trip. :rolleyes:

It is just astonishing that Shackleford allows this to continue. The only explanation can be that he is now full blown part of this troll by Mdawg. Shackleford is either being paid off by Mdawg (my suspicion) or he or someone else at that forum thinks that continuing bullshit is good for the forum (draws more views). But all it really does is drive away more legit members and players who say enough is enough. WOV is down to about 100 members every day (less than 100 on some weekend) when it used to be 300 a day.

It's ridiculous to think that you can prove or dis-prove anything over the course of a really small samples size, hey hey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I Mdawg abruptly announced the end of his current Las Vegas stay and trip.

---

The camel fucker probably went on Hajj to Mecca.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I hope I am not stepping on anyone's toes here that shared information with me, but I am now aware of two different well respected members, here and at least one also at WoV, that were preparing to take Mdawg up on this challenge that has been his signature line at WoV for nearly a year. Both were negotiating through Shackleford the terms of this challenge.

So all of the sudden a couple days ago Mdawg abruptly announced the end of his current Las Vegas stay and trip. This is significant because the terms of his challenge signature (which has now been removed) state "during his current trip".

So with not one but two challengers, who both would have likely been able to prove his claims false, he pulls the rug out by abruptly ending the trip. :rolleyes:

It is just astonishing that Shackleford allows this to continue. The only explanation can be that he is now full blown part of this troll by Mdawg. Shackleford is either being paid off by Mdawg (my suspicion) or he or someone else at that forum thinks that continuing bullshit is good for the forum (draws more views). But all it really does is drive away more legit members and players who say enough is enough. WOV is down to about 100 members every day (less than 100 on some weekend) when it used to be 300 a day.

---

Kew next time you take a shit pull the top of your shirt up over your nose , and the bottom of your shirt down over your knees then take a big snifffffff !!!!! You probably won’t smell anything tho because your shit don’t stink right gunplay

Figured I’d throw this one here. From MDawg at WoV, after all this time we find out he knows a (very) little about card counting and because he is so special, the house allows him to bet max during high counts.

“ In Blackjack if the count is high and a long sequence has passed with no 10s/faces/aces, I'll jack the bet all the way to table max / special limits max, figuring I'll catch a 10/face/ace on the first card dealt and then with the deck so rich in more of the same, hope to catch another. There are other situations where I actually know that the first card out the gate will be a 10 or face, which is MY card. And in those situations jacking the bet usually works out well. But sometimes it works out where the dealer gets the good card face up and you end up with a hard sixteen with a million 10s coming”

Just reading that post that tells you how full of shit he is in multiple ways. Even the most amateur card counter ever sees it.

The fantasy Vegas he describes doesn’t exist PERIOD. A honest Wizard or someone would call this out immediately but he won’t.

Unless of course, the Pit Boss and dealers are in on it, but that’s just crazy Boz talk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Figured I’d throw this one here. From MDawg at WoV, after all this time we find out he knows a (very) little about card counting and because he is so special, the house allows him to bet max during high counts.

“ In Blackjack if the count is high and a long sequence has passed with no 10s/faces/aces, I'll jack the bet all the way to table max / special limits max, figuring I'll catch a 10/face/ace on the first card dealt and then with the deck so rich in more of the same, hope to catch another. There are other situations where I actually know that the first card out the gate will be a 10 or face, which is MY card. And in those situations jacking the bet usually works out well. But sometimes it works out where the dealer gets the good card face up and you end up with a hard sixteen with a million 10s coming”

Just reading that post that tells you how full of shit he is in multiple ways. Even the most amateur card counter ever sees it.

The fantasy Vegas he describes doesn’t exist PERIOD. A honest Wizard or someone would call this out immediately but he won’t.

Unless of course, the Pit Boss and dealers are in on it, but that’s just crazy Boz talk.

---

You mean the Las Vegas this person is describing doesn't exist?? You don't say Boz!! :D;):D

From the moment this person began his thread, entitled "the adventures of..." it has been nothing but pure fantasy.

He has alluded to card counting a number of times now. Never came out and said it, but alluded to it. The idea that a player, who claims he was once banned at multiple casinos for card counting, would be allowed to play openly, in the high limit room (with multiples sets of eyes on him) of one of the sweatiest casinos that uses the most advanced technology to identify card counters and is one of the most aggressive in reporting to the databases, is just pure fantasy. It is as much fantasy as 18 y.o.'s in a row. :rolleyes:

The facts are that a player can still count cards in Las Vegas, but you have to work at it. Play short sessions and move around a lot, so as not to score huge wins that someone has to answer for. Identify and play limits that are better tolerated and accepted and will also keep the wins within accepted range. Play at busier times in the shadow of players betting bigger. Forget about comps, try to play unrated as much as possible.

When I read this, the same thought immediately popped into my mind as yours Boz, why isn't Wizard saying something. And I think we all know the answer to that. There is no "honest" Wizard in this matter. And anyone else that would say something has been removed and is forbidden from doing so.

Any semi sharp player can see how full of shit he is. People who aren't sharp believe all kinds of retarded shit when it comes to gambling, so who cares whether or not they believe him. WOZ is a forum for people who aren't sharp.

Let cunts be cunts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdaewoo

Any semi sharp player can see how full of shit he is. People who aren't sharp believe all kinds of retarded shit when it comes to gambling, so who cares whether or not they believe him. WOZ is a forum for people who aren't sharp.

Let cunts be cunts.

---

The thing that first struck me when I went on forums after a lifetime of operating solo was how gambling-clueless people were, even people who were allegedly expert at something. I was shocked, because I was actually learning stuff about comps and player systems and best times to eat where, but I learned just about nothing about gambling in general and absolutely nothing about what I do best. It was stunning to realize all these know-somethings knew nothing. And all of these folks thought they were jacks of all gambling trades. It's ridiculous.

When I ran into WoV promoting the use of a "parlay analyzer," that pretty much was the fat lady singing for me regarding "forum expertise."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdaewoo

Any semi sharp player can see how full of shit he is. People who aren't sharp believe all kinds of retarded shit when it comes to gambling, so who cares whether or not they believe him. WOZ is a forum for people who aren't sharp.

Let cunts be cunts.

---

The thing that first struck me when I went on forums after a lifetime of operating solo was how gambling-clueless people were, even people who were allegedly expert at something. I was shocked, because I was actually learning stuff about comps and player systems and best times to eat where, but I learned just about nothing about gambling in general and absolutely nothing about what I do best. It was stunning to realize all these know-somethings knew nothing. And all of these folks thought they were jacks of all gambling trades. It's ridiculous.

When I ran into WoV promoting the use of a "parlay analyzer," that pretty much was the fat lady singing for me regarding "forum expertise."

---

I can't for the life of me figure out why you are so stuck on debunking parlays. They are a legit way to gain an advantage in situations where you normally couldn't. There are situations where parlays can achieve a much higher % and earn than straight betting, even if you were a good handicapper.

A parlay analyzer is no different from a VP, keno BJ, craps, or roulette analyzer, they are tools that help one determine percentages.

Anyways, who are these know-somethings who knew nothing and who is claiming to be an expert at what? Are you an expert at sports betting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The thing that first struck me when I went on forums after a lifetime of operating solo was how gambling-clueless people were, even people who were allegedly expert at something. I was shocked, because I was actually learning stuff about comps and player systems and best times to eat where, but I learned just about nothing about gambling in general and absolutely nothing about what I do best. It was stunning to realize all these know-somethings knew nothing. And all of these folks thought they were jacks of all gambling trades. It's ridiculous.

When I ran into WoV promoting the use of a "parlay analyzer," that pretty much was the fat lady singing for me regarding "forum expertise."

---

Only You can Prevent Forest Fires.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

Only You can Prevent Forest Fires.

---

Actually, the "new" mantra, emblazoned on billboards and TV ads is "Only you can prevent wildfires."



On a barely related note...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU-qoSAATfA

It is far to easy in this day and age to portray yourself as something or someone that you are not. This is especially true in the gambling field. Scammer Christopher Mitchell is a good example, not his normal antics we usually see from him, but something a little different this time. A few days ago, a member in Druff’s other forum who participants in exposing CM found an article that he believed to have been written by a professional news outlet regarding CM. The article rant and raved about CM and how he was beating the casinos at will. How he is the GOAT (Greatest OF All Time). As soon as I saw the article I knew exactly what it was. In the publishing world it is known as an advertorial. Otherwise, a “paid advertisement” and the person or business gets to say anything they want about themselves - for a few of course.

It’s really just to easy to be “anyone you want”.



Have a look:

https://www.theamericanreporter.com/...-aka-the-goat/








.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdaewoo

Any semi sharp player can see how full of shit he is. People who aren't sharp believe all kinds of retarded shit when it comes to gambling, so who cares whether or not they believe him. WOZ is a forum for people who aren't sharp.

Let cunts be cunts.

---

^^^^^^^^

THIS

Of course JB & Jwoo are correct, but he is an interesting case study in BS and how the Wizard allows it.

After being called out here (which he reads daily) and by Axel over there he realized he said something stupid. So now the answer is essentially that he gets special treatment at BJ because he plays Baccarat more (?) and because he now brings losing players the casinos way.

So card counting and max spreads is now allowed in Vegas only for players who take the casino for hundreds of thousands at Baccarat. Maybe the casino is glad he is giving them a break from cleaning them out with his ability to “read the cards”, remember that claim.

Basically he got caught so now the claim that can’t be proven is he has “friends” who are dumping large amounts at the slots. The guy is always trying to defend his lies and continue to get the attention he needs and craves.

Given what we see about him as a gambler, I can only shudder to imagine what this bozo is like as an attorney.

As if attorneys didn't already have a bad enough rep...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdaewoo

Any semi sharp player can see how full of shit he is. People who aren't sharp believe all kinds of retarded shit when it comes to gambling, so who cares whether or not they believe him. WOZ is a forum for people who aren't sharp.

Let cunts be cunts.

---

The thing that first struck me when I went on forums after a lifetime of operating solo was how gambling-clueless people were, even people who were allegedly expert at something. I was shocked, because I was actually learning stuff about comps and player systems and best times to eat where, but I learned just about nothing about gambling in general and absolutely nothing about what I do best. It was stunning to realize all these know-somethings knew nothing. And all of these folks thought they were jacks of all gambling trades. It's ridiculous.

When I ran into WoV promoting the use of a "parlay analyzer," that pretty much was the fat lady singing for me regarding "forum expertise."

---

I can't for the life of me figure out why you are so stuck on debunking parlays. They are a legit way to gain an advantage in situations where you normally couldn't. There are situations where parlays can achieve a much higher % and earn than straight betting, even if you were a good handicapper.

A parlay analyzer is no different from a VP, keno BJ, craps, or roulette analyzer, they are tools that help one determine percentages.

Anyways, who are these know-somethings who knew nothing and who is claiming to be an expert at what? Are you an expert at sports betting?

---

I'm an expert at college football betting. There are no "sports betting experts" just like there are no doctors who do brain surgery on Monday and deliver children on Saturday and treat bunions on Sunday.

Regarding parlays, you have got to be kidding me. Outside of the occasional promo where parlay odds are pumped up beyond what they should be,
parlay betting off the board is usually idiotic. Now I am talking off the board, not off frozen lines on parlay cards. And I am talking parlays that do not have OPEN components. Parlay CARDS and OPEN parlays are betable. But in neither case does one need a parlay calculator.

If I have to explain why off the board parlays are generally idiotic, you're beyond salvation, but I'll do it anyway.

Lines move. I know. Huge inside info. Lines vary from book to book and from minute to minute. Lines especially move massively in the two sports that have historically proven most beatable -- college football and college hoops. Some would argue that these are the ONLY beatable sports.

If you are betting parlays off the board at one place and time, you are not getting the optimal numbers for the games involved 99% of the time. That use of non-optimal numbers has a cost, and that cost is not figured into any formula employed by a "parlay calculator." I submit that the cost of employing non-optimal numbers exceeds any angle advantages people think they have by employing parlays.

And not just that. Betting parlays off the board at one place at one time teaches two fundamental bad habits -- impulsivity (I must bet it now) and laziness (why check numbers 24/7 week-long at every location when I can just bet a parlay using my parlay calculator?).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Basically he got caught so now the claim that can’t be proven is he has “friends” who are dumping large amounts at the slots. The guy is always trying to defend his lies and continue to get the attention he needs and craves.

---

This story has always been that he is losing more than he is winning, but just not reporting the losing to us. Now we have it.

The "friends" dumping large amounts into slots (that Mdawg has never mentioned before) are him and his wife or GF, whatever she is. :cool: They lose far more playing slots than he "wins" playing blackjack and baccarat. :rolleyes:

On top of that they lose far more at slots, I still think he is only reporting some of his table games sessions (the winning sessions) to us..

But either way. THIS now explains the comps....over a years worth of suites and food. If that is something that appeals to wealthy people, drop a couple million and receive high end comped suites, food and beverage, for a year, so be it. Too bad he can't be honest because I would love to know exactly how much one has to dump to get what he has gotten comp wise over the last 16 months? :confused: Just for curiosity sake.

One way or another the truth always comes out with these guys and usually it is because they can't help but hang themselves.

Is it REALLY SO hard to believe that mdog has been winning large amounts of money consistently for years while staying complimentary in Las Vegas suites for indefinite amounts of time.

When Mdawg says "I'd say that some blackjack players have no idea what is tolerated and what is not. Because they haven't tried", he obviously is referring to me. Well guess what I do know what is tolerated and what isn't from trial and error, both my own and that of other players that I network with. THAT is how I have come to identify almost exactly what levels are better tolerated at what days and times. THAT is what experience is and I have been at this in Vegas for 14 years now, so I do know what I am talking about.

And while amounts I win, may be modest compared to the amounts he claims to win, I have never had to go back and change the story to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars like he did last fall, when in one sentence the 500k he claimed to have won for months disappeared. That one sentence was: "Additionally wizard and I went over my records and I am about even for this trip". That was really his Newell RV moment that he was never able to recover from. :D

The other very revealing moment occurred at the end of his last trip. Mdawg had been running this "challenge" as his signature for a year. Remember the clause at the end of that challenge....for as long as this trip lasts.

When not one but two different people (I will leave it to them to decide if they want to identify themselves) were ready to accept that challenge because they both had ways to prove he had not won what he claims, what did Mdawg do? He abruptly ended his trip and headed back to California. :D And of course that long running signature involving the challenge magically disappeared. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Of course JB & Jwoo are correct, but he is an interesting case study in BS and how the Wizard allows it.

After being called out here (which he reads daily) and by Axel over there he realized he said something stupid. So now the answer is essentially that he gets special treatment at BJ because he plays Baccarat more (?) and because he now brings losing players the casinos way.

So card counting and max spreads is now allowed in Vegas only for players who take the casino for hundreds of thousands at Baccarat. Maybe the casino is glad he is giving them a break from cleaning them out with his ability to “read the cards”, remember that claim.

Basically he got caught so now the claim that can’t be proven is he has “friends” who are dumping large amounts at the slots. The guy is always trying to defend his lies and continue to get the attention he needs and craves.

---

As I said before, there is somthing more going on than the simple fact that MD is a high roller with lots of money. He has said something about referring players before, but I dont think anyone picked up on it.

MD Said... " Other reasons may have to do with all the high rollers I have referred to the casinos, that are like so many nickels and dimes I carry around in my pocket that I hand out at will. Pretty much all of these referred players are consistent losers, as many of them stick to high limit slots only. I actually try to get some of them to play table games, but that mostly just want to have a drink and zone out in front of a slot machine."

This would explain all the pictures of suits, comps, invites, offers, long periods of time spend in vegas, comp information, and more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The thing that first struck me when I went on forums after a lifetime of operating solo was how gambling-clueless people were, even people who were allegedly expert at something. I was shocked, because I was actually learning stuff about comps and player systems and best times to eat where, but I learned just about nothing about gambling in general and absolutely nothing about what I do best. It was stunning to realize all these know-somethings knew nothing. And all of these folks thought they were jacks of all gambling trades. It's ridiculous.

When I ran into WoV promoting the use of a "parlay analyzer," that pretty much was the fat lady singing for me regarding "forum expertise."

---

I can't for the life of me figure out why you are so stuck on debunking parlays. They are a legit way to gain an advantage in situations where you normally couldn't. There are situations where parlays can achieve a much higher % and earn than straight betting, even if you were a good handicapper.

A parlay analyzer is no different from a VP, keno BJ, craps, or roulette analyzer, they are tools that help one determine percentages.

Anyways, who are these know-somethings who knew nothing and who is claiming to be an expert at what? Are you an expert at sports betting?

---

I'm an expert at college football betting. There are no "sports betting experts" just like there are no doctors who do brain surgery on Monday and deliver children on Saturday and treat bunions on Sunday.

Regarding parlays, you have got to be kidding me. Outside of the occasional promo where parlay odds are pumped up beyond what they should be,
parlay betting off the board is usually idiotic. Now I am talking off the board, not off frozen lines on parlay cards. And I am talking parlays that do not have OPEN components. Parlay CARDS and OPEN parlays are betable. But in neither case does one need a parlay calculator.

If I have to explain why off the board parlays are generally idiotic, you're beyond salvation, but I'll do it anyway.

Lines move. I know. Huge inside info. Lines vary from book to book and from minute to minute. Lines especially move massively in the two sports that have historically proven most beatable -- college football and college hoops. Some would argue that these are the ONLY beatable sports.

If you are betting parlays off the board at one place and time, you are not getting the optimal numbers for the games involved 99% of the time. That use of non-optimal numbers has a cost, and that cost is not figured into any formula employed by a "parlay calculator." I submit that the cost of employing non-optimal numbers exceeds any angle advantages people think they have by employing parlays.

And not just that. Betting parlays off the board at one place at one time teaches two fundamental bad habits -- impulsivity (I must bet it now) and laziness (why check numbers 24/7 week-long at every location when I can just bet a parlay using my parlay calculator?).

---

Was there anyone we know who was suggesting people should make parlays off the boar in the casinos? If you are playing online, as far as I know, it's all off the board. It's the opposite of rare to have a +EV situation using bonuses where using parlays off the board is your best option.

I agree that making random parlays off the board is much worst than simply line shopping and or betting the games individually. So we are in agreement with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

I can't for the life of me figure out why you are so stuck on debunking parlays. They are a legit way to gain an advantage in situations where you normally couldn't. There are situations where parlays can achieve a much higher % and earn than straight betting, even if you were a good handicapper.

A parlay analyzer is no different from a VP, keno BJ, craps, or roulette analyzer, they are tools that help one determine percentages.

Anyways, who are these know-somethings who knew nothing and who is claiming to be an expert at what? Are you an expert at sports betting?

---

I'm an expert at college football betting. There are no "sports betting experts" just like there are no doctors who do brain surgery on Monday and deliver children on Saturday and treat bunions on Sunday.

Regarding parlays, you have got to be kidding me. Outside of the occasional promo where parlay odds are pumped up beyond what they should be,
parlay betting off the board is usually idiotic. Now I am talking off the board, not off frozen lines on parlay cards. And I am talking parlays that do not have OPEN components. Parlay CARDS and OPEN parlays are betable. But in neither case does one need a parlay calculator.

If I have to explain why off the board parlays are generally idiotic, you're beyond salvation, but I'll do it anyway.

Lines move. I know. Huge inside info. Lines vary from book to book and from minute to minute. Lines especially move massively in the two sports that have historically proven most beatable -- college football and college hoops. Some would argue that these are the ONLY beatable sports.

If you are betting parlays off the board at one place and time, you are not getting the optimal numbers for the games involved 99% of the time. That use of non-optimal numbers has a cost, and that cost is not figured into any formula employed by a "parlay calculator." I submit that the cost of employing non-optimal numbers exceeds any angle advantages people think they have by employing parlays.

And not just that. Betting parlays off the board at one place at one time teaches two fundamental bad habits -- impulsivity (I must bet it now) and laziness (why check numbers 24/7 week-long at every location when I can just bet a parlay using my parlay calculator?).

---

Was there anyone we know who was suggesting people should make parlays off the boar in the casinos? If you are playing online, as far as I know, it's all off the board. It's the opposite of rare to have a +EV situation using bonuses where using parlays off the board is your best option.

I agree that making random parlays off the board is much worst than simply line shopping and or betting the games individually. So we are in agreement with that.

---

In redietz' mind everything that's not handicapping is irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smurgerburger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I'm an expert at college football betting. There are no "sports betting experts" just like there are no doctors who do brain surgery on Monday and deliver children on Saturday and treat bunions on Sunday.

Regarding parlays, you have got to be kidding me. Outside of the occasional promo where parlay odds are pumped up beyond what they should be,
parlay betting off the board is usually idiotic. Now I am talking off the board, not off frozen lines on parlay cards. And I am talking parlays that do not have OPEN components. Parlay CARDS and OPEN parlays are betable. But in neither case does one need a parlay calculator.

If I have to explain why off the board parlays are generally idiotic, you're beyond salvation, but I'll do it anyway.

Lines move. I know. Huge inside info. Lines vary from book to book and from minute to minute. Lines especially move massively in the two sports that have historically proven most beatable -- college football and college hoops. Some would argue that these are the ONLY beatable sports.

If you are betting parlays off the board at one place and time, you are not getting the optimal numbers for the games involved 99% of the time. That use of non-optimal numbers has a cost, and that cost is not figured into any formula employed by a "parlay calculator." I submit that the cost of employing non-optimal numbers exceeds any angle advantages people think they have by employing parlays.

And not just that. Betting parlays off the board at one place at one time teaches two fundamental bad habits -- impulsivity (I must bet it now) and laziness (why check numbers 24/7 week-long at every location when I can just bet a parlay using my parlay calculator?).

---

Was there anyone we know who was suggesting people should make parlays off the boar in the casinos? If you are playing online, as far as I know, it's all off the board. It's the opposite of rare to have a +EV situation using bonuses where using parlays off the board is your best option.

I agree that making random parlays off the board is much worst than simply line shopping and or betting the games individually. So we are in agreement with that.

---

In redietz' mind everything that's not handicapping is irrelevant.

---

Or considerably less relevant, would be more accurate. I haven't even availed myself of any of the bonus opportunities thus far. I'll wait until they come to me with offers I consider optimal. I mean, really, why do you think your best use-of-bonus option might be parlays off the board?

I have no problem with people relying on gimmickry to win money betting sports. My hope is that they don't dabble when the gimmickry ends, because that is the goal of the gimmickry being offered. If Stu Ungar lost his ass betting sports, if Phil Mickelson lost his ass betting sports, both being sucked into it, I guess the run-of-the-mill AP has nothing to worry about, eh? Everybody is psychologically bulletproof in AP-land or so the story goes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smurgerburger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Was there anyone we know who was suggesting people should make parlays off the boar in the casinos? If you are playing online, as far as I know, it's all off the board. It's the opposite of rare to have a +EV situation using bonuses where using parlays off the board is your best option.

I agree that making random parlays off the board is much worst than simply line shopping and or betting the games individually. So we are in agreement with that.

---

In redietz' mind everything that's not handicapping is irrelevant.

---

Or considerably less relevant, would be more accurate. I haven't even availed myself of any of the bonus opportunities thus far. I'll wait until they come to me with offers I consider optimal. I mean, really, why do you think your best use-of-bonus option might be parlays off the board?

I have no problem with people relying on gimmickry to win money betting sports. My hope is that they don't dabble when the gimmickry ends, because that is the goal of the gimmickry being offered. If Stu Ungar lost his ass betting sports, if Phil Mickelson lost his ass betting sports, both being sucked into it, I guess the run-of-the-mill AP has nothing to worry about, eh? Everybody is psychologically bulletproof in AP-land or so the story goes.

---

Let me ask you this... Are you retired, lost your touch, and dont really bet much anymore? Perhaps you are not really into making money for your guys or yourself?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smurgerburger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Was there anyone we know who was suggesting people should make parlays off the boar in the casinos? If you are playing online, as far as I know, it's all off the board. It's the opposite of rare to have a +EV situation using bonuses where using parlays off the board is your best option.

I agree that making random parlays off the board is much worst than simply line shopping and or betting the games individually. So we are in agreement with that.

---

In redietz' mind everything that's not handicapping is irrelevant.

---

Or considerably less relevant, would be more accurate. I haven't even availed myself of any of the bonus opportunities thus far. I'll wait until they come to me with offers I consider optimal. I mean, really, why do you think your best use-of-bonus option might be parlays off the board?

I have no problem with people relying on gimmickry to win money betting sports. My hope is that they don't dabble when the gimmickry ends, because that is the goal of the gimmickry being offered. If Stu Ungar lost his ass betting sports, if Phil Mickelson lost his ass betting sports, both being sucked into it, I guess the run-of-the-mill AP has nothing to worry about, eh? Everybody is psychologically bulletproof in AP-land or so the story goes.

---

The bolded nicely sums it up.

Real sports betting is handicapping, everything else is mere gimmickry.

I'm pretty sure 100% of my sports bets in the past 5 years have been parlays. Not a lot but 20k at least in wagers. Parlays are sometimes needed because of properties they have or promotions they fit inside.

Someone gave me a book where parlays on nickel or dime lines has 0 juice. I don't know anything about sports but I can beat 0 juice.

I'm fairly certain all these bets were positive expectations or expected to be by a quite rational and mathematical based approach.

Sports betting isn't my thing though.

Actually nah there were 1-2 straight wagers for my college football team for fun.

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smurgerburger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smurgerburger

In redietz' mind everything that's not handicapping is irrelevant.

---

Or considerably less relevant, would be more accurate. I haven't even availed myself of any of the bonus opportunities thus far. I'll wait until they come to me with offers I consider optimal. I mean, really, why do you think your best use-of-bonus option might be parlays off the board?

I have no problem with people relying on gimmickry to win money betting sports. My hope is that they don't dabble when the gimmickry ends, because that is the goal of the gimmickry being offered. If Stu Ungar lost his ass betting sports, if Phil Mickelson lost his ass betting sports, both being sucked into it, I guess the run-of-the-mill AP has nothing to worry about, eh? Everybody is psychologically bulletproof in AP-land or so the story goes.

---

The bolded nicely sums it up.

Real sports betting is handicapping, everything else is mere gimmickry.

---

Yeah, who the fuck wants a mathematical 25%+ edge when they can scamdicapp a theoretical few percent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

---

can you choose if you want +2 or -2 when betting or does it have to be one or the other?

Either way, it certainly seems as if that would be a good deal. I think I would have to say yes to that offer if there was no time to get the math or data, but somehow I get the feeling the data is going to show that it's not +EV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

---

can you choose if you want +2 or -2 when betting or does it have to be one or the other?

Either way, it certainly seems as if that would be a good deal. I think I would have to say yes to that offer if there was no time to get the math or data, but somehow I get the feeling the data is going to show that it's not +EV.

---

Can you take both bets on the same game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

---

can you choose if you want +2 or -2 when betting or does it have to be one or the other?

Either way, it certainly seems as if that would be a good deal. I think I would have to say yes to that offer if there was no time to get the math or data, but somehow I get the feeling the data is going to show that it's not +EV.

---

I agree, I would initially take the wagers without doing research, but As you say I think it will somehow be -EV. However the same situation but with NBA, I believe would be +EV, even though 2 points in an NBA game as a percentage is “worth less” since NBA scores are much higher than NFL scores, so they have a lower value. Not a huge sports better but I believe .5 point would cost -010 (10 cents per dollar). It would seem a half point would bring you even after considering the juice. Without over analyzing it, seems to be a 1.5 point advantage per game. But I’m sure There is more to the situation, possibly something to do with it being the closing line. Mickey, I’m curious what the answer is since this would seem like an obvious +EV situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PositiveVariance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

---

can you choose if you want +2 or -2 when betting or does it have to be one or the other?

Either way, it certainly seems as if that would be a good deal. I think I would have to say yes to that offer if there was no time to get the math or data, but somehow I get the feeling the data is going to show that it's not +EV.

---

I agree, I would initially take the wagers without doing research, but As you say I think it will somehow be -EV. However the same situation but with NBA, I believe would be +EV, even though 2 points in an NBA game as a percentage is “worth less” since NBA scores are much higher than NFL scores, so they have a lower value. Not a huge sports better but I believe .5 point would cost -010 (10 cents per dollar). It would seem a half point would bring you even after considering the juice. Without over analyzing it, seems to be a 1.5 point advantage per game. But I’m sure There is more to the situation, possibly something to do with it being the closing line. Mickey, I’m curious what the answer is since this would seem like an obvious +EV situation.

---

I have no idea how many games in a season cross key numbers. But my thinking is that your downside would be very little if you wrong in thinking it's +Ev, but your upside has huge potential if you're right. And of course, you could always find a way to make it +EV somehow once you got locked into the bet via other sports books, online bonuses etc. etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PositiveVariance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

can you choose if you want +2 or -2 when betting or does it have to be one or the other?

Either way, it certainly seems as if that would be a good deal. I think I would have to say yes to that offer if there was no time to get the math or data, but somehow I get the feeling the data is going to show that it's not +EV.

---

I agree, I would initially take the wagers without doing research, but As you say I think it will somehow be -EV. However the same situation but with NBA, I believe would be +EV, even though 2 points in an NBA game as a percentage is “worth less” since NBA scores are much higher than NFL scores, so they have a lower value. Not a huge sports better but I believe .5 point would cost -010 (10 cents per dollar). It would seem a half point would bring you even after considering the juice. Without over analyzing it, seems to be a 1.5 point advantage per game. But I’m sure There is more to the situation, possibly something to do with it being the closing line. Mickey, I’m curious what the answer is since this would seem like an obvious +EV situation.

---

I have no idea how many games in a season cross key numbers. But my thinking is that your downside would be very little if you wrong in thinking it's +Ev, but your upside has huge potential if you're right. And of course, you could always find a way to make it +EV somehow once you got locked into the bet via other sports books, online bonuses etc. etc.

---

It would be funny if Mickey is trolling us and says, “Of course it’s +EV dummies!”
Here we are thinking there is going to be “more to it”, and it turns out to be just what it seems - An obvious +EV wager! lol

This reminds me of a situation when I first started playing blackjack. I dont know what we were doing, but I think we were practicing. The subject came up that the average hand value for the player or dealer was over 18(18.5 iirc) and you would be a loser if you as the player started with 18 every time. I said. I think I'm willing to take that bet, Set me an 18 each time and play the dealer's hand as you would normally. My thinking was the fact that I was eliminating ever busting "going first". The betting commenced and I was cleaning up. My friend/partner said he needed to stop and revisit this situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

This reminds me of a situation when I first started playing blackjack. I dont know what we were doing, but I think we were practicing. The subject came up that the average hand value for the player or dealer was over 18(18.5 iirc) and you would be a loser if you as the player started with 18 every time. I said. I think I'm willing to take that bet, Set me an 18 each time and play the dealer's hand as you would normally. My thinking was the fact that I was eliminating ever busting "going first". The betting commenced and I was cleaning up. My friend/partner said he needed to stop and revisit this situation.

---

That is interesting. I think the number you are looking for is less than 18.5. More like 18.3 iirc. Not That it matters.

I wouldn't think that eliminating player breaking first wouldn't matter in this situation. That is not Going to effect the averages is it? The dealer "average" will still be 18.3 or whatever and the player 18.

But what do I know. You may be right. Are you sure your trial size was big enough to be relevant?

Now speaking of the math, the dog person posted at wov today about players playing -EV, but setting a win limit of$3000 and being able to grind their way to that $3000 win every day based only on having a large 100k bankroll.

Is there nobody left there that is able to challenge that kind of crap? Why is wizard silent on something like that. That is sad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Now speaking of the math, the dog person posted at wov today about players playing -EV, but setting a win limit of$3000 and being able to grind their way to that $3000 win every day based only on having a large 100k bankroll.

Is there nobody left there that is able to challenge that kind of crap? Why is wizard silent on something like that. That is sad

---

That has Chrissy Mitchell written all over it. 3% daily return is exactly what Chrissy pitched in his Amazon coloring book on how to be a millionaire in a year. Yes, it’s a real thing.

https://www.amazon.com/Millionaire-B.../dp/B091F5QRM6

It seems like he is just throwing anything out there now trying to get attention and interaction. And we can be sure the Wizard will just ignore it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

---

What the fuck, I'll take a shot even though I am not a sports bettor.
Assume that fair value for half a point is 10 cents on the dollar. The vig is 10 cents on the dollar (-110) so the free 2 points would cost 40 cents on the dollar if we were paying for them instead of getting them for free. Since 40>10 we are good to go with the bet as we are getting the 40 for free.

I won't bother with the underdog explanation since it uses the same logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

This reminds me of a situation when I first started playing blackjack. I dont know what we were doing, but I think we were practicing. The subject came up that the average hand value for the player or dealer was over 18(18.5 iirc) and you would be a loser if you as the player started with 18 every time. I said. I think I'm willing to take that bet, Set me an 18 each time and play the dealer's hand as you would normally. My thinking was the fact that I was eliminating ever busting "going first". The betting commenced and I was cleaning up. My friend/partner said he needed to stop and revisit this situation.

---

That is interesting. I think the number you are looking for is less than 18.5. More like 18.3 iirc. Not That it matters.

I wouldn't think that eliminating player breaking first wouldn't matter in this situation. That is not Going to effect the averages is it? The dealer "average" will still be 18.3 or whatever and the player 18.not

But what do I know. You may be right. Are you sure your trial size was big enough to be relevant?

---

NO, the sample size was nowhere big enough to conclude anything either way. I'm not claiming I was right, or that it was a good bet. IIRC I was still told it was a bad bet, I dont cant recall how all that played out. I'm sure the information is out there.

I'm just saying what my thinking was a the time without knowing the actual math, and I went with it. My downside was very little had I been wrong, but if there was somthing to the fact that eliminating going first made a significant difference then my upside was also significant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Now speaking of the math, the dog person posted at wov today about players playing -EV, but setting a win limit of$3000 and being able to grind their way to that $3000 win every day based only on having a large 100k bankroll.

Is there nobody left there that is able to challenge that kind of crap? Why is wizard silent on something like that. That is sad

---

That has Chrissy Mitchell written all over it. 3% daily return is exactly what Chrissy pitched in his Amazon coloring book on how to be a millionaire in a year. Yes, it’s a real thing.

https://www.amazon.com/Millionaire-B.../dp/B091F5QRM6

It seems like he is just throwing anything out there now trying to get attention and interaction. And we can be sure the Wizard will just ignore it.

---

Easy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

---

What the fuck, I'll take a shot even though I am not a sports bettor.
Assume that fair value for half a point is 10 cents on the dollar. The vig is 10 cents on the dollar (-110) so the free 2 points would cost 40 cents on the dollar if we were paying for them instead of getting them for free. Since 40>10 we are good to go with the bet as we are getting the 40 for free.

I won't bother with the underdog explanation since it uses the same logic.

---

What is the point of the question?

The question itself is silly and horribly flawed for multiple reasons. I'll mention a few of the more obvious ones.

1) Mickey didn't attach a seasonal year to the question. He asked a blanket question as if all years are identical or close to identical.
2) Mickey phrased the question without mentioning totals. How can you ask the question without delineating between sides and totals?

Less than 5% of my wagering is on the NFL, and the majority of that is totals, both of which I have stated before, so I am clearly not an NFL sides bettor and would have no interest or expertise to apply to this particular question.

By asking the question in the tense mickey did, in a garbled present tense, I assume he's asking if I would accept the wagers in 2022. By not pinning down dates and tenses, mickey makes the incorrect assumption that all NFL seasons are the same and should yield the same conclusive answers. By not delineating between sides and totals, mickey makes a similar error in lumping very different things in a single category for the sake of what? Being imprecise?

This is a relatively common problem with math specialists trying to apply what they know to sports. Sports isn't rolling dice. Sports isn't hitting a slot button. Sports is fluid. Mickey asked a crystalline question. Sports isn't crystalline. If you answer this particular question by quoting data mined stats from 2017-2020, for example, whatever conclusion you draw or lesson you try to teach may not only be dated and useless, things may have changed in such a way as to render that lesson completely wrong going forward.

I don't know what point mickey was trying to make with the NFL question. If he was trying to emphasize that point shopping for the NFL is overrated and line moves are often wrong, thus rendering something like a parlay calculator possibly more useful, well, here's a shocker -- everybody knows this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

That is interesting. I think the number you are looking for is less than 18.5. More like 18.3 iirc. Not That it matters.

I wouldn't think that eliminating player breaking first wouldn't matter in this situation. That is not Going to effect the averages is it? The dealer "average" will still be 18.3 or whatever and the player 18.

But what do I know. You may be right. Are you sure your trial size was big enough to be relevant?

---

The 18 bet in blackjack had about a 1.8 to slightly over 2% house advantage. It was countable but not worth much. There was also a side bet called Instant 18 or something. Although I didn't ever see that very much. The 18 bet was pretty available during the eastside Cannery days if I remember correctly. But I'm sure the answers can be found by whoever analyzed those side bets.

I don't have the answer to the question. That's why I asked redietz. He doesn't want to answer.

If you could choose between laying the favorite or taking the dog on every game then that would bring handicapping into it.

I want to know what the answer would be without any handicapping of the teams so let's say you have to either lay the favorites all season or take the dogs all season.

I would think that one would have big edges on games that are-1, -2, -3, -4 and they would cover for games that are -8 and higher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Redietz avoided answering this question I put to him specifically. So I will ask it of everyone. Here's the scenario.

It's the NFL. If someone propositioned you to FLAT BETTING (same wager every game) every game every week for the entire season. All bets made in the same book. And they offered you a 2 point discount on the closing line of every game. By 2 point discount I mean if the line closes at -7 you get the game at -5.

Would you take the bet?

And conversely, if they offered you 2 more points than the closing line would you take it? By 2 more points I mean if the line closes at +7 you get +9.

Remember you have to bet every game every week for the entire year.

---

What the fuck, I'll take a shot even though I am not a sports bettor.
Assume that fair value for half a point is 10 cents on the dollar. The vig is 10 cents on the dollar (-110) so the free 2 points would cost 40 cents on the dollar if we were paying for them instead of getting them for free. Since 40>10 we are good to go with the bet as we are getting the 40 for free.

I won't bother with the underdog explanation since it uses the same logic.

---

What is the point of the question?

The question itself is silly and horribly flawed for multiple reasons. I'll mention a few of the more obvious ones.

1) Mickey didn't attach a seasonal year to the question. He asked a blanket question as if all years are identical or close to identical.
2) Mickey phrased the question without mentioning totals. How can you ask the question without delineating between sides and totals?

Less than 5% of my wagering is on the NFL, and the majority of that is totals, both of which I have stated before, so I am clearly not an NFL sides bettor and would have no interest or expertise to apply to this particular question.

By asking the question in the tense mickey did, in a garbled present tense, I assume he's asking if I would accept the wagers in 2022. By not pinning down dates and tenses, mickey makes the incorrect assumption that all NFL seasons are the same and should yield the same conclusive answers. By not delineating between sides and totals, mickey makes a similar error in lumping very different things in a single category for the sake of what? Being imprecise?

This is a relatively common problem with math specialists trying to apply what they know to sports. Sports isn't rolling dice. Sports isn't hitting a slot button. Sports is fluid. Mickey asked a crystalline question. Sports isn't crystalline. If you answer this particular question by quoting data mined stats from 2017-2020, for example, whatever conclusion you draw or lesson you try to teach may not only be dated and useless, things may have changed in such a way as to render that lesson completely wrong going forward.

I don't know what point mickey was trying to make with the NFL question. If he was trying to emphasize that point shopping for the NFL is overrated and line moves are often wrong, thus rendering something like a parlay calculator possibly more useful, well, here's a shocker -- everybody knows this.

---

Typical, Comrade that you are being an ass fuck over the question. I put lines out there like -7 and -5. I didn't say a fucking thing about totals. So why the fuck would you have to ask a stupid fucking question about whether I'm talking about sides or totals. It's obvious, dickweed, that I'm talking about sides.

Totals are not part of the equation because you have to bet every game every week for the entire season. So you are not going to know what the totals are before agreeing to the bet. Use your head for something besides a hat rack.

And this "which season" nonsense. The only seasons that matter are the ones going forward. So when is the next season coming up. Do you need help figuring that out?

Data mining is not allowed. When you get propositioned to the bet you have 5 minutes to make up your mind. Take it or leave it.

If you want to bet on past games let me know. I'll offer you some lines....or even totals if that's your gig. I'll cut you some unbelievable lines. Some very crystalline lines.

PS: I don't bet parlays you stupid fuck.

How many believe redietz opinion that math is irrelevant in sportsbetting, that only opinions matter?

Quote:

---

By asking the question in the tense mickey did, in a garbled present tense, I assume he's asking if I would accept the wagers in 2022. By not pinning down dates and tenses, mickey makes the incorrect assumption that all NFL seasons are the same and should yield the same conclusive answers. By not delineating between sides and totals, mickey makes a similar error in lumping very different things in a single category for the sake of what? Being imprecise?

---

Mickey,
Literally what was he suggesting? You're going to hustle him by trying to agree to make him take your pastposts as legitimate bets? Dude is just too sharp.

Another thing the Strip majors have going on as far as comp'ed events - are events that have nothing to do with their casinos. You might be flown from home to wine country, taken to local sports stadium events in owner's boxes, race tracks in private suites, dinners at local restaurants, all that, if you are up for it and have the time. These sorts of off-site events are offered only by the top casinos in Vegas.

Today at WoV, Mdog made the above post. I think everyone, regardless of level of play is aware that higher end Strip casinos offer these kinds of perks to their bigger LOSING players, who they categorize as "whales" and "jr or mini whales".

Mdog congrats on qualifying as a top losing player. Enjoy your perks. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

How many believe redietz opinion that math is irrelevant in sportsbetting, that only opinions matter?

---

More than believe Singer played the DUB, had a Newell, or hit a $1.5 million UX hand on his 5th time playing after hitting a multiplied dealt royal on his 2nd time playing the game..... RIP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Another thing the Strip majors have going on as far as comp'ed events - are events that have nothing to do with their casinos. You might be flown from home to wine country, taken to local sports stadium events in owner's boxes, race tracks in private suites, dinners at local restaurants, all that, if you are up for it and have the time. These sorts of off-site events are offered only by the top casinos in Vegas.

Today at WoV, Mdog made the above post. I think everyone, regardless of level of play is aware that higher end Strip casinos offer these kinds of perks to their bigger LOSING players, who they categorize as "whales" and "jr or mini whales".

Mdog congrats on qualifying as a top losing player. Enjoy your perks. :cool:

---

All of that said, I can prove I (we, my wife and I) made money at Caesars Vegas casinos on 1 trip in 2021 and haven’t been back since then. And we get the top level offers to come back based on the play we put through on one trip.

To the guy posting as MDawg, we will be among the 100 invited guests at the opening of Martha Stewart’s restaurant at Paris on the 12th. I look forward to meeting you, even if we don’t know who is who. We can shake hands, take pictures and smile while enjoying the free meal.

Unlike you, I won’t be giving them money. And I’m guessing you won’t be there but you will come back with a bigger invite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

I can prove I (we, my wife and I) made money at Caesars Vegas casinos on 1 trip in 2021 and haven’t been back since then

---

Boz, I hope you are kidding with this "I can prove" comment. But just in case you aren't, let me explain, no one need prove or explain any kind of win over a trip or any short-term period. That happens all the time, both players winning playing -Ev and players playing +EV and losing. That is gambling and variance. :rolleyes:

I realize not everyone cares, but for me the problem occurs when someone claims winning over the long term playing -EV with no explanation. Mdog claims winning almost every day for 16 months playing -EV with no explanation other than "betting into streaks" and a large bankroll somehow enables a player to over come -EV and win. :confused:

Singer, well his claims have been all over the place and change frequently. At one time he claimed 10 years, over a million dollars of winning, playing -EV video poker, not playing 100+ % games, not even using a players card for that added EV, just using a progression system and some "special" less optimal plays and I guess machines telling him when they are hot or cold. :D Now when Singer stole the DU bug claim, he shortened this period from 10 years to 4 years, which he is still claiming (even repeating it today).

So years of winning -EV with no explanation, other than voodoo nonsense (Singer) or winning nearly every day for 16 months, with no explanation of how you overcome -EV are the things that have become pet peeves to me. Not someone winning over a trip or two or three. THAT happens regularly.

Congrats on that big win BTW. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

I can prove I (we, my wife and I) made money at Caesars Vegas casinos on 1 trip in 2021 and haven’t been back since then

---

Boz, I hope you are kidding with this "I can prove" comment. But just in case you aren't, let me explain, no one need prove or explain any kind of win over a trip or any short-term period. That happens all the time, both players winning playing -Ev and players playing +EV and losing. That is gambling and variance. :rolleyes:

I realize not everyone cares, but for me the problem occurs when someone claims winning over the long term playing -EV with no explanation. Mdog claims winning almost every day for 16 months playing -EV with no explanation other than "betting into streaks" and a large bankroll somehow enables a player to over come -EV and win. :confused:

Singer, well his claims have been all over the place and change frequently. At one time he claimed 10 years, over a million dollars of winning, playing -EV video poker, not playing 100+ % games, not even using a players card for that added EV, just using a progression system and some "special" less optimal plays and I guess machines telling him when they are hot or cold. :D Now when Singer stole the DU bug claim, he shortened this period from 10 years to 4 years, which he is still claiming (even repeating it today).

So years of winning -EV with no explanation, other than voodoo nonsense (Singer) or winning nearly every day for 16 months, with no explanation of how you overcome -EV are the things that have become pet peeves to me. Not someone winning over a trip or two or three. THAT happens regularly.

Congrats on that big win BTW. :)

---

Nope, I am not.

I can show we played at a positive number in Vegas in 2021 on one trip. And yes, regardless of what I played in positive EV games my wife played regular slots. But we put a lot through and I can prove we made money because of a few good hits.

Of course it’s luck to be an overall winner and we could argue the numbers on what I played versus what she played versus the comps we received.

And of course I won’t argue it’s not a winning strategy overall.

But we are invited to multiple huge events. Until of course we don’t meet casino expectations.

But yea, I can prove anything I put out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

How many believe redietz opinion that math is irrelevant in sportsbetting, that only opinions matter?

---

More than believe Singer played the DUB, had a Newell, or hit a $1.5 million UX hand on his 5th time playing after hitting a multiplied dealt royal on his 2nd time playing the game..... RIP

---

mental midget max having another spazz attack.