Chip inventory question

[coach belly]

Your anything but a coach

What would you know about coaches?...you were in the band...the marching band, not Black Sabbath.

Now get lost and go back to cheerleading for nancywormm, and spying on IBYA from behind trash cans.

Why don't you confront IBYA and ask him if he is jbjb...instead of being a pathetic coward stalker?

[Moses]

But he HAS taken away your right to free speech....at least in the blackjack community moses! Just as he did mine. You doing your little ranting and "mirror" discussions, on a site, zenzone, that you are the only member is not you exercising freedom of speech. Norm has taken that from you, just as he did me, creeping panther, Zengrifter, Automonkey, Zenking, and many, many more..

I can only control what is in my control. There are plenty of views at ZZ. I do not know why these guys no longer post. I'm inclined to think posters from BJFT are intimidated by Norm. But many are reading.

And yes, he has reduced me to this site....and yes I bad mouth this site, because it is ridiculous..

Naw, this is fun. I would've loved to have some of these guys around to help battle that rat bastard Flash. Can you imagine LarryS, Monet, RobSinger, Mendel, Mendel, and MickeyCrimm combining forces? Coach Bella's starting 5. lol I'll bet you would have never been banned in the first place. Imagine Sir Normcelot trying to ban 18 guys all at once. Hilarious.

So yeah, I am a little angry about that....that this is what this site is, despite Dan's promise months ago, to go in a more productive direction.

It is what it is. Maybe you're trying to hard to put makeup on a pig? I dunno.

[kewlJ]

Moses, you take some of these things too personally. YOU too are a grudge holder. I have some of that in me, but am really trying to let that go. It is no good. It eats you up inside. Always trying to settle scores.

No one fought more with Flash than I did over the years. But it never was personal with me. Flash was misleading players, especially newer players for a very long time. To the point that he mentored new players for a fee. That was what it was really all about with him. I won't even get into the suspicious robbery that Flash suffered, losing funds that belonged to new players he was mentoring...… a LOT of funds. All I am going to say is that people that know more about it than I think Flash's gambling addiction at Craps; and the horses, had a lot to do with that.

I also conversed privately with Flash for several years. He shared some things that I have never revealed, but let's just say it was undeniable Flash had an agenda, to make money off of new inexperienced players. Misleading them, that only he could teach them to play a winning game.....at a fee. Shades of Laurence Revere from the 70's.

But again, it wasn't personal with me, I just wanted the misleading to stop. And it now has. Mostly because Flash is old and in severe declining health. There is no longer a reason, to bad mouth him as you continue to do. Just let it go.

For what it is worth, I have been advised that "Mr Wonderful", "Mr Q" is also not in great shape health-wise. That is part of the reason, I was willing to try to move forward and put the past behind us. Sadly, he was not willing to do so. I have no regrets for trying, for taking the high road.

[Moses]

Moses, you take some of these things too personally. YOU too are a grudge holder..

I'm never going to lose that intensity. If I do? This place will eat me alive. Flash mirrored nearly every single one of my posts from August 2013 to September 2016. I turned the car and me around that day. I became the shit deliverer and no longer the shit taker from that day on.

I have some of that in me, but am really trying to let that go. It is no good. It eats you up inside. Always trying to settle scores...

You kept going after Norm, the head. Remember I said, "you can't reach the head without first taking out a knee." Well, Flash was a knee and I took him out. He posts very little anymore and T3 has tempered his posts considerbly.

No one fought more with Flash than I did over the years.

I ran a close second. T3 and I had good natured fun for the most part. But Flash was brutal. I prefer to be a nice guy and tell a couple of jokes. Then there is that demonic side where those should know not to poke.

But it never was personal with me..

You God Damn right it's personal with me. But that was his decision. Not mine. The difference is I don't quit. He did.

I also conversed privately with Flash for several years. He shared some things that I have never revealed, but let's just say it was undeniable Flash had an agenda, to make money off of new inexperienced players. Misleading them, that only he could teach them to play a winning game.....at a fee.

Yes. Ditto with emails. BTW, he shared that list for others to see. Who knows? One more of them could have been a pit boss.

But again, it wasn't personal with me, .

You really should go back and read some of your work. Yes, it was personal, and to your credit, you destroyed him to anyone that read your posts.

Mostly because Flash is old and in severe declining health. There is no longer a reason, to bad mouth him as you continue to do. Just let it go.

Ahem. I'm not a buyer of that one either. Too many puppets, muppets, and socks over there. Evidently, Norm must hollered a big SHUT THE FUCK UP to them all.

[tableplay]

I don't play card table games so I'm asking for information. Mickeycrimm says it's "huge" knowing the dealer's hole card. My question is how huge is it? In a game such as Mississippi Stud knowing one card is worth what? Isn't it about 2% and is 2% "huge"?

Regarding not knowing how machine free play works: is there anyone who has been in a casino even once who doesn't understand the concept of free play?

Frankly you have to be in a bubble to be any kind of experienced player to earn the claim of "AP" but not know what free play is all about.

Jbjb lost points with that slip up. It made it appear he never actually played in a casino but just participated in forums.

I give him the benefit of the doubt.

Knowing the hole card in Black Jack is worth 9% give or take (depending on rules, etc.).

[jbjb]

I don't play card table games so I'm asking for information. Mickeycrimm says it's "huge" knowing the dealer's hole card. My question is how huge is it? In a game such as Mississippi Stud knowing one card is worth what? Isn't it about 2% and is 2% "huge"?

Regarding not knowing how machine free play works: is there anyone who has been in a casino even once who doesn't understand the concept of free play?

Frankly you have to be in a bubble to be any kind of experienced player to earn the claim of "AP" but not know what free play is all about.

Jbjb lost points with that slip up. It made it appear he never actually played in a casino but just participated in forums.

I give him the benefit of the doubt.

Knowing the hole card in Black Jack is worth 9% give or take (depending on rules, etc.).

That's with discreet play and getting the exact card 100% of the time. It's over 13% with S17, perfect insurance, and late surrender. Plus it being a fast game makes it one of the best plays. Other games give much larger edges but are much much slower.

[kewlJ]

Knowing the hole card in Black Jack is worth 9% give or take (depending on rules, etc.).

Disclosure: I no longer engage in hole-carding. Haven't for about 6 years now. I don't care for winning that way.

That said, the maximum advantage from HCing can't really be achieved because very frequently, you are identifying a HC of 10, under the dealers 10 that is showing making the dealer hand a 20. In these frequent cases there is really only so much that you can do. You can hit your hard 17, knowing the dealer has a 20, but do you really want to hit your hard 18's and 19's EVEN though you know they are losers? If you hit these hands you risk losing the whole gig, exposing what you are doing.

So not hitting these hands, is like "cover". You are giving up some of that maximum advantage.

[jbjb]

Knowing the hole card in Black Jack is worth 9% give or take (depending on rules, etc.).

Disclosure: I no longer engage in hole-carding. Haven't for about 6 years now. I don't care for winning that way.

That said, the maximum advantage from HCing can't really be achieved because very frequently, you are identifying a HC of 10, under the dealers 10 that is showing making the dealer hand a 20. In these frequent cases there is really only so much that you can do. You can hit your hard 17, knowing the dealer has a 20, but do you really want to hit your hard 18's and 19's EVEN though you know they are losers? If you hit these hands you risk losing the whole gig, exposing what you are doing.

So not hitting these hands, is like "cover". You are giving up some of that maximum advantage.

If your just getting pips, it's more like 3-4%. Not hitting 17 or higher is included in discreet play.

[kewlJ]

So the count was positive and he still lost $8800? I find that to be alarming for a card counter to do.

This 2 sentence post proves beyond any doubt that you have absolutely no clue about card counting. Something you have admitted BTW.

So having absolutely no clue, why do you still have an opinion? I'll answer my own question. You can't help yourself because you are so obsessed with anti-APism and anti-KJism and trying to discredit me, that you HAVE to voice your negative comments and opinions, despite that you have no clue what you are talking about.

It was the same thing with counting two tables and gaining an advantage with partial counts. As I mentioned before EVERY count that a card counter gets....is a partial count, because of the unseen cards. So any unseen cards just gets added to the rest of the unseen cards after the cut card.

I knew you wouldn't take my word for it, so I went to a couple well known long-term card counters that I knew also employed tracking multiple table, Richard Munchkin and Don Schlesinger. I asked Munchkin to come here and weigh in. After looking at the site, he said "no way he wanted any part of this site". He did agree to raise the topic on the next viewer mail segment and I don't even know if he followed through. Next up was Don Schlesinger and I just couldn't even bring myself to ask him to come here and be subjected to this crap.

And it wouldn't have mattered because there were other BJ players or former BJ players like RS that weighed in saying they have done some version of tracking a second table and you just dismiss them as well. You dismiss what you don't want to hear, even though you have no clue about the topic. I couldn't subject someone like Schlesinger to that.

And you do this with everyone, mickey included, frequently voicing your predetermined, negative, anti-AP opinion about something you know nothing about. And when I call you out as having a negative anti-AP agenda, you play all innocent and say "who me"?

[Moses]

KJ. How is that you think losing is somehow gaining your EV?

For example. I was 5-0 in MLB for the month of June. But 0-3 on the Atlanta Braves. That friggin Teheran was 0-2. His problem, which is my headfuck, is he throws BBs at the best teams and couldn't throw the ball in the ocean against the lousy teams if he were standing on the beach.

I never watch the games I bet. But I just wanted to look in shortly after the game started to be sure he was pitching. Otherwise the bet was null and void. He already given up a grand slam and they were down to the O's (the worst team in baseball, perhaps history) 4-0 with no outs. The game couldn't have been 5 minutes old. That has to be some kind of a record.

Point is, I'm still on my usual pace of winning 64% of my bets, that some say is not possible...and I'm still looking and have found ways to improve. A recent little nugget of info rewarded me with the biggest payoff in a couple years.

It hurts me watching you take those hits that you don't need to take. I can't imagine what they must be doing to you. There is no question in my mind that if you work on your game then you would avoid those freefalls.

[kewlJ]

KJ. How is that you think losing is somehow gaining your EV?

Losing doesn't gain you EV, playing gains you EV. No offense, but I am going to ignore the rest of your post because sports betting is not relatable to blackjack.

Blackjack is a long term game. In the short-term anything can and will happen. Wild swings, both winning and losing. This is variance. It is part of the math.

What overcomes that short-term variance is a large trial size. This is part of the law of large numbers. You need to hit a certain amount of play, what exactly that is, is fair game debatable, but there is a point for each game, where the number of trials overcomes any short term variance and results will be close to expectation. This is all part of Don's N0 (that is N-zero) discussion.

So you know what EV is. Expected value. So each round of each game has an expected value. And you add all those small parts of expected value up and once you get to the long run, past the N0, results will come reasonable close to expectation.


Almost every year, my accumulated EV and actual results have been very close. This represents the long-term as defined by the LoLN. I have had 2 outlier years, one in each direction, one 60 grand below expectation or accumulated EV and one almost 50k above expectation/ accumulated EV.

And you know what the funny thing about these two outlier years are? They were back to back. So if you add them together, boom, these results also hit expectation or accumulated EV. We are back to a fair discussion of just what constitutes "the long run". But accumulated EV is how you track play, not results, which will go up and down like a yoyo or the stockmarket. Acummulated EV is steady and in the end results and accumulated EV will come in line with each other.

[kewlJ]

Here's the thing about "accumulated EV". Alan never heard of it, so like everything else, he jumped on that, thinking this was one of those "gottcha moments" that he is always looking for.

But the fact is this is not my concept. Everything I do was learned by others before me. In this case, "accumulated EV" is how all the big teams dating back to Uston and including all the MIT teams track play and split up earnings. Nothing new. Maybe they didn't call it "accumulated EV". Maybe they used different terminology, but that is exactly what they did. BUT god forbid, Alan is not familiar with it, so he attacks it....and me.

[Moses]

KJ. the sports bet analogy exactly pertains to blackjack. Regardless, of how well you are doing or how much you are earning, you never stop looking for value. IT's called tweaking. Now my tweak paid back $5,100 on a $2,200 bet. ERA doesn't win ballgames. Wins win ballgames. However, lines are often set by a pitchers ERA.

Okay, you just did great job of explaining to me what you learned in a book and what a sim would reflect. I will be the first one on my feet to give Don S a standing O for his fine work, endless dedication, and effort to a game cards played by people. Unfortunately, WE play a game of people with cards.

Therefore, your uncommon valor and determination will unltimately lead to your demise. Doesn't seem fair does it? IT's just the way it is when our opponent can quit at anytime. Ironic, I think you are smarter than you think you are, and you think you are pretty darn smart. Your mind is closed and that costs you time and money.

[Rob.Singer]

kew, you're throwing around the same load of crap that you did on your two-table nonsense, where "partial counts" mean something. Why do you persist with such a moronic position?

Now we get further treated to the "accumulated EV" baloney. It's no different than the wizard, Dancer, and a few others claiming "even if we lose, we win!" because every hand was played at a theoretical edge. The old phantom bucks claim again.

So let's hear the REAL story why this Munchkin weirdo is afraid to appear here. Obviously, he doesn't like to take a beating on the tough questions like you do. Or maybe he's unlike you and has a problem with lying.

[kewlJ]

kew, you're throwing around the same load of crap that you did on your two-table nonsense, where "partial counts" mean something. Why do you persist with such a moronic position?

More complete nonsense, against proven mathematics, by Rob Singer. Disclaimer: Rob Singer claims to have won a million dollar playing negative EV video poker using a progressive betting system.

So you have heard of "wonging"? (named for Stanford Wong, aka John Ferguson) Wonging into a game involves backcounting the game and jumping in when the player is at an advantage . Sometimes the backcounting begins at the start of a new game (new shuffle), but more often than not in the middle of play. Partial count. All that matters is the cards that you see. Doesn't matter if 10 rounds were played without you seeing them. This is a proven mathematical fact.

You can actually walk by a table with 3 players and see a bunch of small cards, and know the next round favors the player regardless that there were many unseen rounds.

Learn the math, Singer.

[mickeycrimm]

I don't play card table games so I'm asking for information. Mickeycrimm says it's "huge" knowing the dealer's hole card. My question is how huge is it? In a game such as Mississippi Stud knowing one card is worth what? Isn't it about 2% and is 2% "huge"?

Regarding not knowing how machine free play works: is there anyone who has been in a casino even once who doesn't understand the concept of free play?

Frankly you have to be in a bubble to be any kind of experienced player to earn the claim of "AP" but not know what free play is all about.

Jbjb lost points with that slip up. It made it appear he never actually played in a casino but just participated in forums.

I give him the benefit of the doubt.

You are making a blanket statement on freeplay. Most everyone knows how to download and use freeplay they've generated. But only a small percentage of people know how to use a freeplay loss rebate promotion to an advantage. Even AP's don't know it until they run into it then research it. I think jbjb had just never run into that kind of promotion before.

[Moses]

Okay, one other little tidbit and then I will shut up. The NFL channel ran a continuous marathon of the year each team won the Super Bowl over Memorial Weekend. I recorded everyone of them. I have it on while I'm doing blackjack research, practicing, or just getting ready to go play for the day. Some, my lady for example, says I'm overly competitive and too driven to win.

Well, that's true. But not my point. In everyone of those shows, only one team was the ultimate winner. Now the average fan might remember those were great teams. However, those were also teams, that overcame great adversity. Even the 1972 Dolphins went 17-0 a feat which has never again been accomplished. But their QB broke his leg in the 5th game and was replaced by an old verteran that almost didn't survive training camp. Then he stepped back to the bench when the starting QB returned for the Super Bowl.

My point is, playing with everything in me to be the ultimate winner each day. It may not always happen but it's the way I always compete.

[Moses]

You can actually walk by a table with 3 players and see a bunch of small cards, and know the next round favors the player regardless that there were many unseen rounds.

Learn the math, Singer.

C'mon KJ. That is not math. Maybe good instincts. Perhaps a decent assumption. But not math. How do you know a bunch of large cards didn't come out in the one or two previous rounds you didn't see?

[coach belly]

But only a small percentage of people know how to use a freeplay loss rebate promotion to an advantage. Even AP's don't know it until they run into it then research it. I think jbjb had just never run into that kind of promotion before.

This is not the case at all...jbjb did not understand how basic freeplay worked.

It had nothing whatsoever to do with a loss rebate promotion.

I saved the thread, read it and weep....

My best advantage play in AC is at Harrahs Marina.. With my free play I go to video roulette with the single zero...
Bet half red, half black... Cover single zero to ensure profit..

That's a horrible way to play it. Your getting less than half value every time.

Can you mathematically explain what you mean above?

You are getting the ~98% return with the video roulette play. Say you have $100 freeplay. $50 on red, $50 on black. One will win giving you $50 back plus another $50. If the green number wins, your $3 on it will net you 35-1 for $105 or so.

Pretty good idea. Saves the hassle of playing multiple BP hands.

You'll almost ALWAYS get around $100 (or 100% of your freeplay) without significant risk of a string of lousy VP hands.

Might be a better idea if VP is excluded from FP. But VP is by far superior to anything else.

What if you don't hit much on VP? You could brick some, most or all of your free play away.

That can't happen with the 100 video roulette play, if you spread 48-48-4, then you are guaranteed either 96 or 140.

No you aren't. Better check your math again. You'll profit 48 or 140. 36 out of 37 times, assuming a single zero wheel, you'll only get the 48.

The machine pays the winning color 48, plus you keep the 48 you bet.

It's like hitting 2-pair on VP.

No. Outside bets pay even money.

Yes...but they don't take your winning bet away.

You bet 48 on red, 48 on black, 4 on green.

Red comes out...they take your 48 on black and 4 on green.

You keep the 48 you bet on red, and they pay bet another 48.

So you end up with 96.

Just like table roulette...they cap your bet with the marker and pay it...they don't take the bet away.

I usually side with jbjb on stuff, but this isn't true. You put $0 into the machine, you download $100 in FP. Once you cycle through $100 in action, you cash out whatever is remaining on the credit meter. $48 red, $48 black, $4 green. At the end of the spin, you will have cycled through $100. You'll either have $96 (which is ALL profit, since you put $0 into machine), or else you'll have $140 if green hits ($140 in profit).

1/37 * 140 = 140/37
+
36/37 * 96 = 96*36/37
==
((140/37) + (96*36/37)) = value of $100 in FP on roulette machine (using that method).
==
$97.19

If they're giving you the original 48 back, then I agree. But they're not supposed to.

I think jbjb has outed himself.

He portrays himself as a fulltime AP pro, and as it turns out...he doesn't know jack shit.

Piss off. I've done this before so I know I'm right. Once I saw how I got ripped off, never again.

There's two ways. Downloadable where you don't need cash or the kind that you need an initial seed money. What kind is he describing? The way I'm reading, it's the latter.

The latter also returns your bet, the former doesn't.

It's the same on both.

The downloadable type doesn't give your bet back. On vp, if you get two pair, you only get 2 credits minus the 1 that was bet for a net gain of only 1 credit. On the initial seed types, you get the 2 credits AND 1 for the initial bet for a net gain of 2 credits. It's not the same.

This is all wrong too!

You don't get 3 credits for 2 pair, it's 2 credits.

Free play or otherwise...you bet 5, the 5 is gone....
you hit 2 pair - you win 10. You don't get the original 5 back too.

Unreal...wow you sure spent a lot of time building up a fake persona...what a mental patient.

I'm just not seeing how he's getting paid 2 TO 1 on even money bets. I guess I'd just have to watch.

It pays 2-for-1. That's how every machine I've ever seen works (that I know of / remember). When you make a $5 bet, your credits immediately go down, even before your wager is resolved. Once it is resolved (if a winner) it pays 2.

Bet 10 on heads, 10 on tails, flip a coin, take the losing bet and pay the winner.

You'll end up with 20 total...just like you started with.

I'm shocked I'm saying this, but, I agree with coach belly.

Agreed, but the casino doesn't let you keep the initial bets, just the wins. You're +10

What game does the casino not let you to keep the initial bets on a winner?

[jbjb]

This is not the case at all...jbjb did not understand how basic freeplay worked.

It had nothing whatsoever to do with a loss rebate promotion.

I saved the thread, read it and weep....

That's a horrible way to play it. Your getting less than half value every time.

Can you mathematically explain what you mean above?

You are getting the ~98% return with the video roulette play. Say you have $100 freeplay. $50 on red, $50 on black. One will win giving you $50 back plus another $50. If the green number wins, your $3 on it will net you 35-1 for $105 or so.

Pretty good idea. Saves the hassle of playing multiple BP hands.

You'll almost ALWAYS get around $100 (or 100% of your freeplay) without significant risk of a string of lousy VP hands.

Might be a better idea if VP is excluded from FP. But VP is by far superior to anything else.

What if you don't hit much on VP? You could brick some, most or all of your free play away.

That can't happen with the 100 video roulette play, if you spread 48-48-4, then you are guaranteed either 96 or 140.

No you aren't. Better check your math again. You'll profit 48 or 140. 36 out of 37 times, assuming a single zero wheel, you'll only get the 48.

The machine pays the winning color 48, plus you keep the 48 you bet.

It's like hitting 2-pair on VP.

No. Outside bets pay even money.

Yes...but they don't take your winning bet away.

You bet 48 on red, 48 on black, 4 on green.

Red comes out...they take your 48 on black and 4 on green.

You keep the 48 you bet on red, and they pay bet another 48.

So you end up with 96.

Just like table roulette...they cap your bet with the marker and pay it...they don't take the bet away.

I usually side with jbjb on stuff, but this isn't true. You put $0 into the machine, you download $100 in FP. Once you cycle through $100 in action, you cash out whatever is remaining on the credit meter. $48 red, $48 black, $4 green. At the end of the spin, you will have cycled through $100. You'll either have $96 (which is ALL profit, since you put $0 into machine), or else you'll have $140 if green hits ($140 in profit).

1/37 * 140 = 140/37
+
36/37 * 96 = 96*36/37
==
((140/37) + (96*36/37)) = value of $100 in FP on roulette machine (using that method).
==
$97.19

If they're giving you the original 48 back, then I agree. But they're not supposed to.

I think jbjb has outed himself.

He portrays himself as a fulltime AP pro, and as it turns out...he doesn't know jack shit.

Piss off. I've done this before so I know I'm right. Once I saw how I got ripped off, never again.

There's two ways. Downloadable where you don't need cash or the kind that you need an initial seed money. What kind is he describing? The way I'm reading, it's the latter.

The latter also returns your bet, the former doesn't.

It's the same on both.

The downloadable type doesn't give your bet back. On vp, if you get two pair, you only get 2 credits minus the 1 that was bet for a net gain of only 1 credit. On the initial seed types, you get the 2 credits AND 1 for the initial bet for a net gain of 2 credits. It's not the same.

This is all wrong too!

You don't get 3 credits for 2 pair, it's 2 credits.

Free play or otherwise...you bet 5, the 5 is gone....
you hit 2 pair - you win 10. You don't get the original 5 back too.

Unreal...wow you sure spent a lot of time building up a fake persona...what a mental patient.

I'm just not seeing how he's getting paid 2 TO 1 on even money bets. I guess I'd just have to watch.

It pays 2-for-1. That's how every machine I've ever seen works (that I know of / remember). When you make a $5 bet, your credits immediately go down, even before your wager is resolved. Once it is resolved (if a winner) it pays 2.

Bet 10 on heads, 10 on tails, flip a coin, take the losing bet and pay the winner.

You'll end up with 20 total...just like you started with.

I'm shocked I'm saying this, but, I agree with coach belly.

Agreed, but the casino doesn't let you keep the initial bets, just the wins. You're +10

What game does the casino not let you to keep the initial bets on a winner?

Not quite coach. Only hedging those roulette games. I know/knew EXACTLY how it works on regular slots/video poker As for me, I use mine on vulturing 100%+ plays. So far today, +130.25 from $35.75. Still have $4.25 left.