The rollercoaster that is professional card counting.

I don't know what level stakes you play dannyj, but your question got me thinking. There is a debate in the blackjack community as to whether it is beneficial for low limit players, who are counting and playing with an advantage to be playing rated.

One the one hand, at such low stakes and such small EV, almost anything received in terms of offers, will be a plus. At that level just a little bit of say MP coupons could really help, as well as anything to reduce food expenses.

And while that may be beneficial for a short time at low stakes, as soon as a player moves up in stakes, even a little, the negatives immediately kick in. Your local casino and personnel already has all your info. :rolleyes:

So in my eyes, it is like this. You only get the chance to be anonymous once. Once they know who you are, you can't start playing anonymous as if they will forget. :rolleyes: So when making this decision, I recommend players think about the future and where they want to go with this and not just about the little bit extra it might bring at the current situation.

Of course the ideal situation is to play rated locally at low limit early on and get the benefit associated with doing so, including maybe some comped rooms in Vegas for a yearly or semi-yearly trip, and then when you are ready to move up in stakes, start playing unrated elsewhere. So my situation sort of worked great. But not everyone is going to be picking up and moving cross country just when they are moving up in stakes. ;)

But I am just saying, try to look ahead. Try to see determine where you are going with your play and how playing rated now, might effect you later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoSox

KewlJ wrote:

" But then you come along, and give him a little credibility, when you know thisis much more than Moses and I playing different games. What is up with THAT BoSox? You just stirring the pot a little? "

I am not stirring up anything. First I have not played single deck games for a very long time now. I also have no knowledge at all on the column counts that Moses and Three use, so I do not feel I have a right to opine. Last we do know that Moses plays to short sessions using "and this is important" very small spreads. How do we know this? Because he has told us numerious times that he was formally kicked out of many places and needed to cut his already small spread in single deck and change his game arround with much more emphasis on playing efficiency to get the job done. What do you get out of all that? A very controlled game with much, much smaller variance swings that you and I are accostomed to seeing. By the way those books going back to the 80's knew nothing about column counts. Both of you are completely blind to what each other is doing, and I stand firm to what I wrote in my first post above.

---

Don't buy into all that column count hype. There could be some advantage, especially at single deck (if it is dealt deeply), but Reno isn't dealt that deeply, especially if a player starts winning. ;)

The original claims that T3 made and now moses seems to be going with, were and remain mathematically impossible. T3 said gains of 500% over traditional card counting. Traditional card counting yields and advantage in the neighborhood of 1%, so 500% gain would be playing to a 5% advantage. Completely impossible from card counting. You need to be hole-carding to achieve that kind of advantage....right jbjb?

Even if you sat at a table with your computer on the felt, you aren't going to get a 5% advantage from card counting.

And guess what, even the nut job T3 backed away from that when Don Schlesinger was finally allowed to challenge him. T3 said his early small sample size research showed 5%, but with a larger sample size it came down much closer to what we all get.

The bottom line is these guys with their specialized super-duper counts, greatly exaggerate any benefit of such a count, while always completely ignoring any sort of higher error rate that will cut into or even wipe out any small benefit. There is no magic pill. There is no magic count.

And except for moses, and Reno, there aren't many decent single deck games remaining that could benefit slightly from such a method and even if you are moses (god forbid, I wouldn't wish that on anyone) and had access to those games, they just aren't going to tolerate it for long except maybe spreading $5-$15 and even then, Reno doesn't tolerate that.

This is just not how you win at today's games. OK, gotta go to work. Spending way to much time here arguing with a nickel player spreading $5-$15. :(

KewlJ wrote:

"The original claims that T3 made and now moses seems to be going with, were and remain mathematically impossible."

Maybe Moses is the same person as Three. Sorry, I got to mess with both of you. I would not enter this pissing contest with Rob Singer's dick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoSox

KewlJ wrote:

"The original claims that T3 made and now moses seems to be going with, were and remain mathematically impossible."

Maybe Moses is the same person as Three. Sorry, I got to mess with both of you. I would not enter this pissing contest with Rob Singer's dick.

---

Moses has so many personalities, I really thought you were one at first. You're off that list. I made a mistake.

"Moses has so many personalities, I really thought you were one at first. You're off that list. I made a mistake."

Nice to meet you MaxPen. Wasn't one of Moses sox called Tater or tarter sauce or something like that?

The reason for all this bickering is as simple as this:

Kew just can't STAND that anyone else is more knowledgeable about BJ, its theory, and its math, than him. And we've all seen how he so entertainingly comes apart at the seams whenever anybody challenges his words or asks him the tough questions about his claims.

Inasmuch as a true winning professional would never be riled from other's opinions, kew's wordflow (and he provides a LOT of them day & night/here & there as everyone sees) is his #1 enemy. He says so many things that just don't work together, and with his obtuse penchant for throwing out so much concocted personal information about himself--a good part which is strange, humiliating, or perverted to the point of self-obsession--he has brought every bit of this upon himself.

I can't say it hasn't been fun watching his house of cards come tumbling down, and seeing his peers take him out to the woodshed just makes people here feel warm and fuzzy all over, I'm sure. But I do feel bad for the guy at the same time. He's worked hard to create his pretend life on the forums, and the reason he fights so mightily for the final word is because, well, that's all he has.

Let's all pitch in for tickets to Thunder Down Under for him. Should make him feel a whole lot better.

Rob, all you are is a provoker and like to instigate with a full lack of understanding. People should not take you seriously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoSox

Rob, all you are is a provoker and like to instigate with a full lack of understanding. People should not take you seriously.

---

We don't. But as you know, there are thousands upon thousands of suckers out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

The reason for all this bickering is as simple as this:

Kew just can't STAND that anyone else is more knowledgeable about BJ, its theory, and its math, than him. And we've all seen how he so entertainingly comes apart at the seams whenever anybody challenges his words or asks him the tough questions about his claims.

Inasmuch as a true winning professional would never be riled from other's opinions, kew's wordflow (and he provides a LOT of them day & night/here & there as everyone sees) is his #1 enemy. He says so many things that just don't work together, and with his obtuse penchant for throwing out so much concocted personal information about himself--a good part which is strange, humiliating, or perverted to the point of self-obsession--he has brought every bit of this upon himself.

I can't say it hasn't been fun watching his house of cards come tumbling down, and seeing his peers take him out to the woodshed just makes people here feel warm and fuzzy all over, I'm sure. But I do feel bad for the guy at the same time. He's worked hard to create his pretend life on the forums, and the reason he fights so mightily for the final word is because, well, that's all he has.

Let's all pitch in for tickets to Thunder Down Under for him. Should make him feel a whole lot better.

---

Rob, I’m a part time recreational bj player who is trying to step up my game. Everything I read in kJ’s posts rings true. I appreciate the time he takes to give honest, straightforward answers to bj questions and I’m grateful he’s willing to share his experiences. It’s not often you get good constuctive advice on forums.

With this said, I did agree with parts of your long rant/post a couple days ago where you talked about why people are on these forums. You made a lot of good points.

I think it’s fun to poke fun at people on these forums, but there is probably a place where some take it too far, and it starts getting ugly and achieves no purpose other than to get a rise out of someone. I guess that will always be part of these forums. It’s a place where people can bully others without any repercussions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoSox

KewlJ wrote:

" But then you come along, and give him a little credibility, when you know thisis much more than Moses and I playing different games. What is up with THAT BoSox? You just stirring the pot a little? "

I am not stirring up anything. First I have not played single deck games for a very long time now. I also have no knowledge at all on the column counts that Moses and Three use, so I do not feel I have a right to opine. Last we do know that Moses plays to short sessions using "and this is important" very small spreads. How do we know this? Because he has told us numerious times that he was formally kicked out of many places and needed to cut his already small spread in single deck and change his game arround with much more emphasis on playing efficiency to get the job done. What do you get out of all that? A very controlled game with much, much smaller variance swings that you and I are accostomed to seeing. By the way those books going back to the 80's knew nothing about column counts. Both of you are completely blind to what each other is doing, and I stand firm to what I wrote in my first post above.

---

Don't buy into all that column count hype. There could be some advantage, especially at single deck (if it is dealt deeply), but Reno isn't dealt that deeply, especially if a player starts winning. ;)

The original claims that T3 made and now moses seems to be going with, were and remain mathematically impossible. T3 said gains of 500% over traditional card counting. Traditional card counting yields and advantage in the neighborhood of 1%, so 500% gain would be playing to a 5% advantage. Completely impossible from card counting. You need to be hole-carding to achieve that kind of advantage....right jbjb?

Even if you sat at a table with your computer on the felt, you aren't going to get a 5% advantage from card counting.

And guess what, even the nut job T3 backed away from that when Don Schlesinger was finally allowed to challenge him. T3 said his early small sample size research showed 5%, but with a larger sample size it came down much closer to what we all get.

The bottom line is these guys with their specialized super-duper counts, greatly exaggerate any benefit of such a count, while always completely ignoring any sort of higher error rate that will cut into or even wipe out any small benefit. There is no magic pill. There is no magic count.

And except for moses, and Reno, there aren't many decent single deck games remaining that could benefit slightly from such a method and even if you are moses (god forbid, I wouldn't wish that on anyone) and had access to those games, they just aren't going to tolerate it for long except maybe spreading $5-$15 and even then, Reno doesn't tolerate that.

This is just not how you win at today's games. OK, gotta go to work. Spending way to much time here arguing with a nickel player spreading $5-$15. :(

---

Yeah. No card counter is getting an overall 5% edge. Maybe if the count is high enough for that given round, sure. But not overall.

jbjb wrote:

"Yeah. No card counter is getting an overall 5% edge. Maybe if the count is high enough for that given round, sure. But not overall."

Moses is not making those claims.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

. It’s a place where people can bully others without any repercussions.

---

And that is all this Robert Harry Argentino person, posting as Rob Singer is....a bully. A bitter, 70 year old man, unhappy with his choices in life, his gambling addiction, and the fact that he now lives in a trailer in his children's driveway, mooching utilities and internet service.

But don't take my word for it. Look him up for yourselves. You will see a history of fraud, bankruptcies, evictions, legal judgements and welfare fraud for abusing food stamps.

While some of us worry about being banned at a casino, Argentino/Singer has been banned from the food stamp program. :D

And this history is NOT financial tools and plays to help a person build wealth as Mr. Argentino/Singer claims. It is a history of dishonesty, broken promises, failure to meet financial obligations. It is a look into the soul of a very despicable human being.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

. It’s a place where people can bully others without any repercussions.

---

And that is all this Robert Harry Argentino person, posting as Rob Singer is....a bully. A bitter, 70 year old man, unhappy with his choices in life, his gambling addiction, and the fact that he now lives in a trailer in his children's driveway, mooching utilities and internet service.

But don't take my word for it. Look him up for yourselves. You will see a history of fraud, bankruptcies, evictions, legal judgements and welfare fraud for abusing food stamps.

While some of us worry about being banned at a casino, Argentino/Singer has been banned from the food stamp program. :D

---

My goodness, what the hell is going on here?


Rob Singer wrote:


"My wife, little dog and I drove up and I flew my children and their families to a 6-bedroom home I rented on the Lake at Incline Village. Cindy and I never once left the house other than for our daily 5 mile walks. The young people did all the shopping, work, and going out for entertainment. We simply supplied all the funding from A to Z."


Rob, if you were getting free food stamps, no wonder you were able to fly your children from all over the country to that lake.

I'll tell you what is going on Bosox. This Rob Singer character and his dispicable behavior and comments lead a number of us to pay the $3 and look into who he really is. And to no ones surprise, his real history is quite different than his internet "story".

Revealing this is something I would normally not do and even in this case I struggled with it. But Argentino/Singer's horrific attacks on my partner after he had passed as well as attacks on spouses that had passed of other members, is a line that transcends rules of decency.

KJ. Dont you ever shut up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

The reason for all this bickering is as simple as this:

Kew just can't STAND that anyone else is more knowledgeable about BJ, its theory, and its math, than him. And we've all seen how he so entertainingly comes apart at the seams whenever anybody challenges his words or asks him the tough questions about his claims.

Inasmuch as a true winning professional would never be riled from other's opinions, kew's wordflow (and he provides a LOT of them day & night/here & there as everyone sees) is his #1 enemy. He says so many things that just don't work together, and with his obtuse penchant for throwing out so much concocted personal information about himself--a good part which is strange, humiliating, or perverted to the point of self-obsession--he has brought every bit of this upon himself.

I can't say it hasn't been fun watching his house of cards come tumbling down, and seeing his peers take him out to the woodshed just makes people here feel warm and fuzzy all over, I'm sure. But I do feel bad for the guy at the same time. He's worked hard to create his pretend life on the forums, and the reason he fights so mightily for the final word is because, well, that's all he has.

Let's all pitch in for tickets to Thunder Down Under for him. Should make him feel a whole lot better.

---

Rob, I’m a part time recreational bj player who is trying to step up my game. Everything I read in kJ’s posts rings true. I appreciate the time he takes to give honest, straightforward answers to bj questions and I’m grateful he’s willing to share his experiences. It’s not often you get good constuctive advice on forums.

With this said, I did agree with parts of your long rant/post a couple days ago where you talked about why people are on these forums. You made a lot of good points.

I think it’s fun to poke fun at people on these forums, but there is probably a place where some take it too far, and it starts getting ugly and achieves no purpose other than to get a rise out of someone. I guess that will always be part of these forums. It’s a place where people can bully others without any repercussions.

---

Of COURSE a lot of the things Kew says here and on half a dozen other forums "rings true". That exactly fits the M.O. of (in this particular case, re: gambling) an attention and relevance-seeker who thinks he's clever and out-smarting others by sprinkling in believable aspects of his concocted existence on the internet. And that's because I know him and no one else does. Remember when he threatened to kill me? That's what did him in. I contacted the FBI, and while I learned a whole lot about his real life then, I don't have the right to release any of the info here. He is, undeniably, fooling everybody with his constant flow of bs about his BJ "life"....if you could call it that.

And from the outside you can easily tell he has this internet charade going by the way he gets unraveled whenever he has even the smallest question re: his "nothing-but-winning" come his way. Even more so, he keeps getting forced into making up mostly lies about me in particular (because I'm a known celebrity to him) about being broke, evicted, having ever gone on welfare, and having multiple bankruptcies other than the one I filed in, get ready, 1996! which was done to eliminate liability from being a stupid victim of a bad Calif. land deal. I ask anyone who wants the truth to pay the three bucks or whatever it is and verify anything you like. You'll find kew just says these things because it's what all con men do once the walls start to close in on them. You see how he feels writing my real name makes him think he's "getting to me"? He's like a copycat of that libtard idiot Corey Booker. I released my real name, info about my bankruptcy WHILE I WAS STILL AN AP, and my life's work history, on my website just before my first book was published in 2000.

If he were to wise up, he'd leave the forum universe for good before it becomes too much for him. His peers here seem to believe that day has already come.

I have no more to say about this internet forum clown. Those of you who want/need to believe him--have at it. You're being used and you know it.

Is there anybody that has been on this forum for any length of time and witnessed Robert Argentino's constant inappropriate behavior that thinks he has some sort of information on me but won't release it? :D

So here's the deal. I posted the real information on Robert Harry Argentino, direct from publicly available information and even encourage people to go read for themselves.

Argentino responds that he has top secret information on me provided by the FBI.

Is there anyone, even the usual confederacy anti-AP guys that really believes this goofball?

Why should all members be subjected to any of this? Both of you should be ashamed to carry on like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I posted the real information on Robert Harry Argentino, direct from publicly available information

---

I'm not sure that you have done that.

Singer is a public figure, his identity is known, so doxxing is not an issue.

But I can't recall anyone posting anything other than what amounts to "heresay" about him.

I suggest that you go back to the website where you paid for the info and post a screen shot, or copy and paste whatever info you paid for.

Here is your chance to put this all to rest, I'm especially interested in what information you have regarding him and foodstamps.