Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 81 to 99 of 99

Thread: Use of Win Goals and Stop Losses

  1. #81
    @DanDruff, I wasn't being sarcastic. I said "wow" because I had no other words.

    You're telling me his max bet was 3 hands of $25K and he won $15 Million because he got on a lucky streak? Even if he was playing $75K on one hand (instead of spread out on 3 hands, it'd be easier to do this with 1 big hand instead of 3 little hands) -- that would be a whopping 200 unit win. That's pretty big. In comparison, that's like a $5 player (flat betting $5 per hand, 1 hand per round) and winning $1,000.

    Sure, that's very possible n all. [When I say "very possible n all", I mean it IS possible, just like how hitting a royal flush back-to-back is possible.] I'm just going to throw this out there: I'm very suspicious that he went on some massive winning streak. I am more likely to believe that he actually had an edge and grinded it out.

    "Massive variance" is not a reason why he didn't have an edge (that's what you're arguing, right?). All "massive variance" means is he has the balls and money to put down the cash to play the game.

    http://apheat.net/2013/05/03/don-joh...ore/#more-3115

  2. #82
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I have to admit: the math guys have all the answers. Just show me the money.
    Now you get it. These guys spend hour after hour, day after day, year after year, THEORIZING about every aspect of gambling. Few of them actually gamble. Heck, all you need to do is compare their "Big Jackpot Pictures" thread to the one here. Their collection of high-rolling AP's have numerous pictures that give new meaning on how to play penny, 2c, nickel, quarter & 50c video poker "with an edge". They even put up their wins from WinPoker and video poker.com !! ROTFLMFAO!!!

    So you get what you get. These guys don't like actual wording so they choose the theoretical interpretation instead. That way they can do what they do best: try to convert, then namecall. Penny losers like ibeatyouraces can keep whining about me while everybody ignores him, and his day is made. And that forum can forever keep making challenges that they have proven never to have the stomach or the wherewithal to actually follow thru on. It's all nothing more than a game of theory to them. I wonder how their phantom bucks feel as they look over our jackpot pictures....

  3. #83
    You're just an easy target, Rob. And prove those jackpots are yours. Bet you can't!

  4. #84
    JBJB, have you learned nothing? When you said that, everybody cringed. Now Rob will bet you that he can, and that he was banned by Bellagio, and his tax returns prove he won, and it'll involve a whole lot of money (and you won't have that much money), and there will be a lot of back and forth, and then Alan will offer to broker the bet, and I'll repeat my parable from Guys and Dolls about the jack spitting cider into ears, and you'll refuse to make the bet, and so on and so on.

    It's deja vu all over again.

    Please spare us.

  5. #85
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    All your theory does is help you deal with it.
    When theory meets practice, it's a good thing.

    When you still haven't accomplished either, it's a very bad (love-in with strangers on the internet) thing.

  6. #86
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    It's deja vu all over again. Please spare us.
    Were either side of this really comfortable with their stance, we wouldn't be doing the Wizard dance, "It isn't so much a lack of faith in myself. As I've said many times, the more ridiculous a belief is, the more tenaciously it tends to be held."

  7. #87
    It would almost be like the bet I offered on WoV that I could play my strategy in front of the wiz and them, and once it looked really possible, they backed out with a plethora of excuses. My favorite? Math Extremist,upon facing the reality of it all as opposed to his much safer and idiotic theories, suddenly requiring me to pay his airfare and all other expenses. When it gets real, they are one big joke over there. But other than that redietz is mostly correct. Internet bets never really go anywhere. How could they, when at least one of the parties is anonymous?

    jbjb, I just saw a wounded ibeatyouraces crying like the baby he is over spilled milk again, of course, with another big assist from me It seems the fact that he SAYS he's paid some amount of taxes is supposed to mean some sort of gambling prowess, which at the same time is suppose to constitute absolute proof of his anonymous bruteness in casinos!

    Proving jackpots are mine from the many I published in my Gaming Today column thru the more recent ones here is easy when done in person. But you guys are so full of envy & hate (other than Shack--I sent him several of my big hits that equal around $150k, and he was his true decent self) that you'd claim the W2G's are "photoshopped or made up"...just as the critics did in my 8 years writing for GT days. Then if the critics finally succumb, it's only natural to claim "bbbbut...you just HAD to have lost all of it & more"! So why wait--instead, go right to the horse. Bet me that I can't win a session played while you witness. I'm still in Nevada right now; it should be easy for all you wordly gambling experts to handle. And don't leave out that confused dufus ibyaces.

  8. #88
    It's easy to shoot video now in casinos. I don't need to bring in a camera anymore. My phone shoots high definition videos that I've used on my TV show.

  9. #89
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    @DanDruff, I wasn't being sarcastic. I said "wow" because I had no other words.

    You're telling me his max bet was 3 hands of $25K and he won $15 Million because he got on a lucky streak? Even if he was playing $75K on one hand (instead of spread out on 3 hands, it'd be easier to do this with 1 big hand instead of 3 little hands) -- that would be a whopping 200 unit win. That's pretty big. In comparison, that's like a $5 player (flat betting $5 per hand, 1 hand per round) and winning $1,000.

    Sure, that's very possible n all. [When I say "very possible n all", I mean it IS possible, just like how hitting a royal flush back-to-back is possible.] I'm just going to throw this out there: I'm very suspicious that he went on some massive winning streak. I am more likely to believe that he actually had an edge and grinded it out.

    "Massive variance" is not a reason why he didn't have an edge (that's what you're arguing, right?). All "massive variance" means is he has the balls and money to put down the cash to play the game.

    http://apheat.net/2013/05/03/don-joh...ore/#more-3115
    Well, after reading the AP Heat article on Don Johnson, I understand a lot more what he did. His 46-minute video gave incomplete information on what he was doing, which made it appear that he simply got lucky to win $15 million like he did.

    I'm talking about this article, not the one you posted: http://apheat.net/2013/05/02/don-joh...eat-blackjack/

    In reality, he seems to have used specific math-based "stop-loss / stop-win" strategies centered around his freeplay and loss rebate, which resulted in +EV play. Interestingly, this strategy isn't too different from optimal strategy for existing "we cover your first $100 of losses" slot promotions that exist around Vegas for new players.

    He also was artificially obnoxious/distracting during his blackjack play, which confused dealers and sometimes caused errors in his favor. I'm not sure I believe he won 3 bets per session from these errors, but it probably helped at least a little.

    And finally, he was indeed counting cards! That was also notably absent from previous reports/interviews of Johnson. He wasn't doing traditional bet sizing related to the count, but he was abandoning ship during highly negative count shoes, throwing phony tantrums and getting up from the table. Then he would have secret partners come to the table (pretending to not be associated with him), and either play out the remainder of the bad shoe (with lower bets) or convincing the dealer to reshuffle. Had Johnson simply asked for a reshuffle, they would obviously know what he was doing, and deny his request.

    With these details, now I believe that Johnson was an effective advantage player, and I have respect for what he did.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  10. #90
    Thanks for posting the link to the article. Curiously, the article discuss stopping points for winning using different criteria including profit and number of hands. In short: win goals even with a player advantage that started at .93% over the house.

  11. #91
    Originally Posted by OneHitWonder View Post
    Were either side of this really comfortable with their stance, we wouldn't be doing the Wizard dance, "It isn't so much a lack of faith in myself. As I've said many times, the more ridiculous a belief is, the more tenaciously it tends to be held."
    Uh oh, sounds like religion is on the docket.

  12. #92
    Regarding Don Johnson, what Dan is reporting is pretty much what I read. He cut sessions short when winning and played to a loss figure that enabled the rebate to kick in, then stopped. He controlled number of hands played "per session," and had the casinos competing against each other for his action, so he could bounce from one to another all on the same trip. I hadn't read this, but it seemed to me that he may have put in morning shifts at one casino, then changed to another casino for afternoon shifts.
    Last edited by redietz; 05-18-2015 at 02:31 PM.

  13. #93
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Regarding Don Johnson, what Dan is reporting is pretty much what I read. He cut sessions short when winning and played to a loss figure that enabled the rebate to kick in, then stopped. He controlled number of hands played "per session," and had the casinos competing against each other for his action, so he could bounce from one to another all on the same trip. I hadn't read this, but it seemed to me that he may have put in morning shifts at one casino, then changed to another casino for afternoon shifts.
    Opportunities in gambling are almost limitless with the proper bankroll. I like what this guy did.

  14. #94
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Uh oh, sounds like religion is on the docket.
    Yes, that's how the Wizard "wins" arguments over there. He "turns" everything into so-called religion, and then parades that stupid belief of his own about the supposedly ridiculous beliefs of others. Seems to work wonders over there.

    In the old days over there, "the boot" loomed for anyone who pointed out that his sponsor, Bodog online casino, was owned by a convicted US felon hiding out in the small South American countries. Remember that "Spanish Word of the Day" thread? I believe that the Wizard used to visit some of those countries to see his old friend. In any event, it was a major conflict of interest to pretend to be a professional mathematician but take money on the side for it from Bodog. Even now, he is nothing more than a "rental scientist" who works for a casino coupon outfit to endorse an assortment of online casinos.

  15. #95
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Opportunities in gambling are almost limitless with the proper bankroll. I like what this guy did.
    So are the pitfalls. A picture is worth a thousand words, but it takes 10,000 to validate it.

  16. #96
    Originally Posted by dandruff
    Then he would have secret partners come to the table (pretending to not be associated with him), and either play out the remainder of the bad shoe (with lower bets) or convincing the dealer to reshuffle.
    I'm extremely suspicious of this statement. Am I supposed to believe the biggest player at the casino wasn't playing on a reserved table?



    Rob, I don't think anyone doesn't believe you can win in a single session. It's quite easy, especially when you use a martingale-type approach. I think we'd be far more interested if you could show your approach is +EV. You did the math to figure out the chance of trip ruin, right? What's the average expected win (on a non-ruin trip)?
    Last edited by RS__; 05-18-2015 at 03:37 PM.

  17. #97
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    I'm extremely suspicious of this statement. Am I supposed to believe the biggest player at the casino wasn't playing on a reserved table?
    They reserve tables at the request of high rollers. If you are okay with others being able to sit with you, they won't prevent it. If Johnson had people ready to play off the negative counts, then obviously he didn't ask for it to be reserved.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  18. #98
    RS and Dan, I'm glad you two mentioned this from two different viewpoints. It's trivia, but I was always confused about scenes from "Tilt," the ESPN poker melodrama, where the Australian high roller comes into town to play against "The Matador," and then is okay with other people sitting down and playing at their ultra-high limit table. These "other people," it turns out, are Matador confederates (of course).

    I just couldn't buy into that scenario. It seemed far fetched. Dan, could this actually happen in poker? I'm surprised anyone with serious money would allow it in poker, and I would be surprised a casino would allow other high rollers to crash the empty blackjack table, too. I'd expect the house to have a counter upstairs keeping tabs on the action. Maybe you could pull it off once, but that would be about it.

    Anyway, this is really interesting, so please let me know what you guys think.

  19. #99
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    I'm extremely suspicious of this statement. Am I supposed to believe the biggest player at the casino wasn't playing on a reserved table?
    Rob, I don't think anyone doesn't believe you can win in a single session. It's quite easy, especially when you use a martingale-type approach. I think we'd be far more interested if you could show your approach is +EV. You did the math to figure out the chance of trip ruin, right? What's the average expected win (on a non-ruin trip)?
    I don't believe you were on the forum at the time, but after the group layed into me about my play strategy not being able to win when I offered to play a session for a bet, they then came out and said what you did about a single session. So I said I would win at least 7 or 8 out of 10 (for a $25k bet) and I'd win at least $25,000 overall (for another $25k). Their big claim was that I'd lose my $57,200 session bankroll at least one time (which has never happened in 300 sessions, because there were always cashouts into the soft profit pool along the way), and therefore my collection of "small wins" (win goal was $2500 and I'd quit the session upon attaining at least that figure) would easily be wiped out. Wrong on several counts however, first because of what I just mentioned about what a losing session is, then because critics are quick to point out possible big losses, but for some reason they can't ever visualize possible giant winners (which always happened far more often than losing sessions).

    I used to keep a cumulative weekly tally on my website, but this is what I remember. First, no slot club benefits of any kind were ever included in my reported wins/losses on my site & in GT. Cash in & out of the machines only. I did and still do play mostly -EV machines. The Atlantis is the only casino that had 10/7 DBP up thru the $100 machines, and I played there as often as I could until they were removed in the early 2000's. So really, very very little of my play was is +EV. I have a 15% chance of losing a session (and a loser is anywhere from $1 to $57,200) and my RoR was too small to be concerned about since I had a 3X a session bankroll as an overall gambling bankroll. I believe my avg. losing session loss was around $3800, and my avg. winning session win was between $3000 and $7000--I just don't remember. I had just under a 5% win goal each session.($2500)

    To people who only believe winning at vp "over time" can't be possible without some sort of "edge", I'll never be believed. But if anyone ever had the courage to try it, even on 1c thru $1 with a $25 win goal, they would see. Until then, people can say I'm some kind of fraud, they can claim GT was somehow in cahoots with me each week, and they can argue about it with me more than this dice problem has been discussed. But as far as I know, I'm the only professional gambler who has ever made the front page of GT and an inside page of the LV Sun at the same time, who put up a huge cash escrow betting any and all LV big time AP's (led by Fezzik) that I could absolutely prove that I have won what I said I had won. That's the closest I ever came to showing proof, which would have taken many weeks but would have been worth it.So now I'm content watching clowns like ibeathisass lie while we travel around in a $600k RV that we bought with vp winnings.
    Last edited by Rob.Singer; 05-18-2015 at 06:29 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •