Originally Posted by
mickeycrimm
But also according to you Shack is a loser that doesn't know anything.
Shack is a loser? In what sense of the word?
If we are talking about his results as a player, I have no idea.
Has he ever reveled any kind of results? Without knowing the numbers, I would find it very hard to believe Michael is a loser as far as long-term gambling results. He is just way too smart, completely understands the mathematics involved with all games and only plays when he believes he has a significant advantage.
I remember one private discussion I had with him concerning a card counting opportunity and he wasn't all that interested. His response was something along the lines that "he just didn't do much card counting any more. That the advantage is just too small to make it worthwhile for him". Basically saying he was only interested in plays with a larger advantage. (This was post WoO/WoV sale, so presumably he wasn't interested in small potatoes
)
My point being it is very hard to see a guy with that kind of knowledge and mathematical understanding, only interested in higher advantage plays ending up a loser (results). If he did there is something else going on there.
(and I am not suggesting anything).
Now if the term 'loser' is referring not to results, but to him as a person....well that's something else. He does have some qualities that make him a rather small individual in my book. But that's a different discussion.
As far as "doesn't know anything"....well I have already addressed that. Michael Shackleford is a brilliant mathematical mind, in reference to gambling and other topics. I wish I has one-tenth his mathematic ability.