Getting tired of the trolling here -- please read this thread -- NEW RULES

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Good luck Dan and my best to my friends and fellow AP's. Continued good health to Alan and better health and recovery to Blackhole.

---

Your "fellow AP's" will tell you there's no such thing as luck. You didn't know that?
Now you can go back to your whimpering.

---

There you go twisting shit again. Some of them call luck variance (I use both terms). The guys who have been APing for years who are in the black will tell you it's not by luck they are winning, its due to the math and skill.

If you have a big enough advantage on something, you can be certain it's not luck, its just simple math. For example: If you played 100 table game match plays over the course of a few years it would be almost imposable to lose given a simple basic strategy. That's not luck.

If someone is winning because they get a bunch of multi line dealt royals, I would say they were lucky.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Yes. He should stay off forums. Soon the casinos will separate the tables even further.

---

Ever since kew blabbed about his "secret" special ability of being able to see every card at the table next door, .

---

There you go twisting shit again. No one said they can see every card at the table next door. You dont have to see every card to know its better or worst than the table you are at.

---

And you call yourself an advantage player?

No bj counter would have any idea which table has the better count WITHOUT KNOWING 100% OF THE CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN PLAYED AT BOTH TABLES. Anything less constitutes guessing, with the remainder left up to hope. Is this what you guys are all about?

I suspect Dan doesn't have the time to read every post to keep his forum policed up. I suggest a function where anyone can report a post as pure trolling. Rob will never abide by the new rules. He has never followed the rules on any forum he has participated in, hence he was given the boot. I think a function where a post can be reported, Dan can review it, make a decision, then either let the post stand or delete it and bar the person from the thread, would work pretty good.

I'm sorry to say it, but I must. This forum worked well when it was only us dumb, recreational players who were here. The dumb, recreational players with the exception of me are all gone. And it's you smart guys who brought the trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

I suspect Dan doesn't have the time to read every post to keep his forum policed up. I suggest a function where anyone can report a post as pure trolling. Rob will never abide by the new rules. He has never followed the rules on any forum he has participated in, hence he was given the boot. I think a function where a post can be reported, Dan can review it, make a decision, then either let the post stand or delete it and bar the person from the thread, would work pretty good.

---

It's funny watching mickey try to play the part of the aware, caring, intelligent poster, who sees all, suspects all, and knows all. And while the guy yearns to be known for having the virtues of a saint, the alcohol on his breath and the lack of responsibility in his life tell quite a different story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Good luck Dan and my best to my friends and fellow AP's. Continued good health to Alan and better health and recovery to Blackhole.

---

Your "fellow AP's" will tell you there's no such thing as luck. You didn't know that?
Now you can go back to your whimpering.

---

There you go twisting shit again. Some of them call luck variance (I use both terms). The guys who have been APing for years who are in the black will tell you it's not by luck they are winning, its due to the math and skill.

If you have a big enough advantage on something, you can be certain it's not luck, its just simple math. For example: If you played 100 table game match plays over the course of a few years it would be almost imposable to lose given a simple basic strategy. That's not luck.

If someone is winning because they get a bunch of multi line dealt royals, I would say they were lucky.

---

Great--so you expanded on your gut feel theory.

BJ counting has a very tiny "edge" for the competent player. That says it all from a practical, theoretical, and mathematical point. As such, anyone who is stupid enuf to try to convince others that counting two tables simultaneously is possible, must have the mathematical facts readily available. All you've provided is a helter-skelter twist as it relates to statistics. FAIL.

Rob... you know by now that the AP Team is very loyal to other AP Team members. If one AP Team member says it's true, it must be true.

They won't show the rest of us it's true, but they know it's true.

Unfortunately, in the case of counting two tables, there is no math formula for them to stand on. On the other hand, they can figure the chance of two dice coming up 11 once, twice, three times, etc.

But how do they figure missing one card, or two cards, or a cocktail waitress in the way for one round, or someone big sitting at third base or first base?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

I suspect Dan doesn't have the time to read every post to keep his forum policed up. I suggest a function where anyone can report a post as pure trolling. Rob will never abide by the new rules. He has never followed the rules on any forum he has participated in, hence he was given the boot. I think a function where a post can be reported, Dan can review it, make a decision, then either let the post stand or delete it and bar the person from the thread, would work pretty good.

---

It's funny watching mickey try to play the part of the aware, caring, intelligent poster, who sees all, suspects all, and knows all. And while the guy yearns to be known for having the virtues of a saint, the alcohol on his breath and the lack of responsibility in his life tell quite a different story.

---

There you go, Dan. This is how much Rob respects your new rules.

Mickey, are you really without sin?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I'm sorry to say it, but I must. This forum worked well when it was only us dumb, recreational players who were here. The dumb, recreational players with the exception of me are all gone. And it's you smart guys who brought the trouble.

---

Afraid not, Alan. You used to 86 people just for disagreeing with you. It's not the AP's making all the trouble here. It's the confederacy of dunces. You guys continue to mock and degrade AP's every chance you get. It's pure hubris, ego, you can't stand it because you guys are a losers at gambling so in your minds everyone else, including AP's, should be losers.

Your buddy, blackhole portrays himself as a fairly well off guy who many times in his life has blown off thousands of dollars in casinos like it was nothing and had a blast doing it. That is an unsubstantiated claim. How come you guys haven't brow beaten him over it and demanded proof?

Mickey, you weren't here. I'm not even going to bother with your comments.

And it was the "smart guys" who put this forum out of control that prompted me to sign it over to Dan. I didn't want the liability of the insults and the libel anymore.

And while you are at it show some proof that you hardly go to the office.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

There you go twisting shit again. No one said they can see every card at the table next door.

---

That is all the haters do on this site....twist and change what was said to suit themselves. It's dishonest. It is essentially lying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

You don't have to see every card to know its better or worst than the table you are at.

---

100% correct! And mathematically proven so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

No bj counter would have any idea which table has the better count WITHOUT KNOWING 100% OF THE CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN PLAYED AT BOTH TABLES. Anything less constitutes guessing, with the remainder left up to hope.

---

100% wrong! And mathematically proven so.

Typing in caps doesn't make what you are saying any less wrong. This statement clearly shows you have no idea what you are talking about.

Always comes back to the same thing: "It just doesn't take long to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking". Singer clearly is in the 'just talking' crowd at least on this subject, which he has clearly demonstrated he doesn't have a clue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Mickey, you weren't here. I'm not even going to bother with your comments. And it was the "smart guys" who put this forum out of control that prompted me to sign it over to Dan. I didn't want the liability of the insults and the libel anymore.

---

No, it was your good friend, your old best buddy, Rob Singer, who put the forum out of control, and he continues to do so. From this forum he has libeled and smeared more people than carter has pills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

I suspect Dan doesn't have the time to read every post to keep his forum policed up. I suggest a function where anyone can report a post as pure trolling. Rob will never abide by the new rules. He has never followed the rules on any forum he has participated in, hence he was given the boot. I think a function where a post can be reported, Dan can review it, make a decision, then either let the post stand or delete it and bar the person from the thread, would work pretty good.

---

It's funny watching mickey try to play the part of the aware, caring, intelligent poster, who sees all, suspects all, and knows all. And while the guy yearns to be known for having the virtues of a saint, the alcohol on his breath and the lack of responsibility in his life tell quite a different story.

---

There you go, Dan. This is how much Rob respects your new rules.

---

Name ONE THING that's not true about that mickey :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Mickey, are you really without sin?

---

Don't hand me that crap, Alan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

That is all the haters do on this site....twist and change what was said to suit themselves. It's dishonest. It is essentially lying.



100% correct! And mathematically proven so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

No bj counter would have any idea which table has the better count WITHOUT KNOWING 100% OF THE CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN PLAYED AT BOTH TABLES. Anything less constitutes guessing, with the remainder left up to hope.

---

100% wrong! And mathematically proven so.

Typing in caps doesn't make what you are saying any less wrong. This statement clearly shows you have no idea what you are talking about.

Always comes back to the same thing: "It just doesn't take long to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking". Singer clearly is in the 'just talking' crowd at least on this subject, which he has clearly demonstrated he doesn't have a clue.

---

So to the "guy" who has said he's "through posting on this forum because if all the insensitive comments"....more BS from an AP BSer.

However, I'm interested in you're comment about "mathematically proven so". Exactly where is that located, and if it's in your AP "PR Packet", I suggest you think of a new excuse.

It would have been better if any of you AP bsers would have taken any statistics classes in college before coming on forums trying to spread your load of crap. You might fare OK with somebody like Martha Stewart, who's shown she's far more comfortable taking in the nonsense of gay men than those normal guys who obviously intimidate her. But when you try to make up such nonsense and then whine about how it's "not your job to support any of it to anyone who questions you" then you lose.

Now comes the part when you and your ilk are being asked to explain how you know one table is better than the other, MATHEMATICALLY, when you know 100% of the cards on your table but have no idea how many cards you've missed at the other--or what they are. And while I understand that cocktail waitress asses getting in the way are irrelevant to someone as confused as you, please break your phony word about not responding to the brutes and splain how you see thru balls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

So to the "guy" who has said he's "through posting on this forum because if all the insensitive comments"....more BS from an AP BSer.

However, I'm interested in you're comment about "mathematically proven so". Exactly where is that located, and if it's in your AP "PR Packet", I suggest you think of a new excuse.

It would have been better if any of you AP bsers would have taken any statistics classes in college before coming on forums trying to spread your load of crap. You might fare OK with somebody like Martha Stewart, who's shown she's far more comfortable taking in the nonsense of gay men than those normal guys who obviously intimidate her. But when you try to make up such nonsense and then whine about how it's "not your job to support any of it to anyone who questions you" then you lose.

Now comes the part when you and your ilk are being asked to explain how you know one table is better than the other, MATHEMATICALLY, when you know 100% of the cards on your table but have no idea how many cards you've missed at the other--or what they are. And while I understand that cocktail waitress asses getting in the way are irrelevant to someone as confused as you, please break your phony word about not responding to the brutes and splain how you see thru balls.

---

It isn't up to you whether I participate here or not. That is my decision, and I will do as I please. So just shut the fuck up you homophobic lying piece of shit.

Interesting that you yet again, injected some homophobic comment, where there was not even a hint of gay topic. You did that last week when I told the story of my former roommate/professional poker player, as well. You responded with some sort of homophobic comment, when the fact is there was no mention of anything even remotely having to do with gay topic in that story....and for good reason....my former roommate was and is not gay. He is straighter than you. I can even say he is FAR straighter than you because anyone as obsessed with homosexuality as you, bringing it up constantly, clearly is one huge closet case. It never fails to be the case, Nancy. ;)

It isn't my job to show you the math. 30 years ago when Stanford Wong took back-counting, which was nothing new and rebranded it with his 'fancy' name, "wonging", he laid out all the math for everyone to see, based on the effect of removal of cards seen, vs the IHA (initial house advantage). Today it is even easier to do...just plug the cards into any decent computer simulator and tell us what it says? :confused:

So here's the thing: you are walking past a 6 deck table that just happens to be ready to deal the first hand after a shuffle. One player and the dealer. So as you are standing there the player receives, 3,6 and the dealer a 4. Player doubles his nine according to basic strategy and pulls a 4. dealer draws 3, 6, and 5 for a 18. Based on those 7 cards, the player will be at a slight advantage on the next round. Again, this is proven by effect of removal vs IHA. There is no dispute...well not by anyone who has a clue. :rolleyes:

So let's change the scenario just a bit. You are walking by the same table and see the same cards. Only difference is 2 decks have been played that you didn't see. Absolutely nothing changes! Based on those 7 cards seen, the player will be at a slight advantage on the next round. Unseen cards are unseen cards....doesn't matter if they are unseen because they were played before you walked by, or they are unseen because they have yet to be played. Based only on the 7 cards seen....the player will be at a slight advantage on the next round!

Now, let's talk about missing a card or two here and there, whether this occurs while tracking a second table, or if you just happen to be distracted (in your case by a cute guy that you want to spew hate at and secretly fuck at the same time) and miss a card at your primary table. Makes absolutely no difference. Unseen cards are unseen cards. But the advantage is determined by what you do see.

But, never let the facts get in the way. Continue on with your blabbering about something you obviously know nothing about. :rolleyes:

That was an excellent explanation of unseen card effects. I haven't played blackjack in 25 years, and I know nothing, but that was cogent and clear. I don't see what can be argued with -- unseen cards tally as unseen cards. Eminently logical and obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

That was an excellent explanation of unseen card effects. I haven't played blackjack in 25 years, and I know nothing, but that was cogent and clear. I don't see what can be argued with -- unseen cards tally as unseen cards. Eminently logical and obvious.

---

Thank you, redietz. You "don't see what can be argued with"?? You just wait. :rolleyes: Wait and see how the "anti-APers" twist everything said to suit themselves and make false arguments that aren't there. :cool: