Sad? Deal with it. The same way I deal with you calling me a shyster.Originally Posted by kewlJ
Sad Alan....very sad.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Sad? Deal with it. The same way I deal with you calling me a shyster.Originally Posted by kewlJSad Alan....very sad.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
How dare you Midwest Player!Originally Posted by Midwest Player
I am kidding.MP, your post has the ring to it of you being afraid to offend me. No need. Our online relationship goes back far enough that I feel like I know your intentions and you are not one of those looking to do me any harm. I consider you one of the good guys. So don't be afraid to speak your mind.
Look here is the way it is. I am gay. I am neither ashamed of that, nor proud of it. I don't have rainbow flags hanging at my home, nor wear shirts or slogans declaring my sexuality. I don't attend many gay pride parades. I don't need that kind of thing. For me being gay is just about who I choose to love and spend time with. It isn't a lifestyle so to speak. Just one of many things that make me who I am. I actually focus much more on my Irish heritage than I do of being gay. But neither do I hide from it.
So being gay in my mind is irrelevant to my participation on any gambling related forum. My participation on such a forum is about me being a professional blackjack player for 15 years.
Now that said, my participation on forums for the last 10 years, as you well know has been about me sharing my experiences and journey as an AP and professional blackjack player. I truly believe we can all benefit from one another's experiences. The saying goes that you learn from experience, but I don't think it has to be all your own experiences. You can learn from other players experiences, especially mistakes.
So in sharing experiences, it is just not about losing this or that, or winning this or that. It is about the journey, how different things like long negative swings effect you. How coming out the other end of such swings, and once again meeting up with accumulated EV, just as the math say you will, effects you. How heat and back offs effect you. But these things don't effect you in a vacuum. It effects your personal life, where you live, moving across country, renting a home, or buying a property. And to all that it effects who you share your life with.
And particularly in my case, my late partner/spouse was more than just my personal mate. He was my business partner and was with me for each and every one of those 15 years of my career (1 year apart when I moved to Vegas before he joined me). Some of my experiences directly involved him and his part of our business partnership. He won our biggest Jackpot of more than 100k a couple years ago. He also won our second biggest payday of 50k on a 50 play video poker machine. In blackjack, I developed my own unique version of the big player call in approach specifically to take advantage of our situation, making it look like a father / son playing together. And in recent years when his back problems limited his blackjack play, he served as my driver, and that allowed me to really take my short session hit and run style to new levels. Just think of the reduced down time.
So, basically I am saying I couldn't accurately share my journey without mention of my partnership, professional and personal. But, with the exception of one thread at WoV, announcing and describing my wedding to my partner, I tried really hard to describe our partnership in a manner that would minimize anyone's discomfort.
I don't know how I would have handled it here, knowing the type of site this was (a lot of trolling, attacks and hate) when I began. But I didn't even get to make that decision. Someone....and a fellow AP, that I like(d) and respect, decided it would be funny to out me. He did so in a joke. He often jokes about that kind of thing on many sites. And I can appreciate that kind of humor. Maybe he didn't realize the level of hate, including homophobia on this site and what the results would be. I try to give him the benefit of doubt. But I was just saying in response to Boz's comment, that on this site...it wasn't me that put it "out there".
Last edited by kewlJ; 08-20-2018 at 10:25 AM.
Shyster is not equivalent to a homophobic hate attack.Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonSad? Deal with it. The same way I deal with you calling me a shyster.Originally Posted by kewlJSad Alan....very sad.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I expect this from Singer. I didn't from you.
Do you think only gays have anal sex, kewlj?
Alan, don't do that. Everyone knows exactly what your intention was.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You seem to have a real problem with the truth Alan. I see some Donald Trump in you. (and THAT is an image I really don't want)
You know Alan, it sounds like you are trying to tell everyone that you like anal sex.....that you have your GF's and/or paid sexual partners strap something on?Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
BUT, I am not going to go there. Nope I am not going to make mention of that.
And with that, it's off to work.
Originally Posted by kewlJOriginally Posted by Alan MendelsonShyster is pretty bad when your Jewish or at least if you are a New York Jew that practices Law...Originally Posted by kewlJ
Is ‘Shyster’ Anti-Semitic?
By Daniel J. Kornstein
Sometimes the most common terms mean different things to different people. Meaning depends on context, as we lawyers well know. After all, interpretation is a large part of what we do. The New York Observer, for example, recently (April 21) complained about the National Review’s use of the word “shyster.” According to the Observer, “shyster” is a “deplorable and demeaning word,” “not acceptable in polite company,” “offensive, redolent with prejudice and hatred.”
The part about “prejudice” threw me for a moment, but the Observer explained that “shyster,” “has traditionally been loaded with anti-Semitism.” To the Observer, it has “bigoted associations” because people who use the epithet are “talking about Jewish lawyers who in their minds are no different from the scheming, devious Shylock.”
Get it? The first syllables are the same: Shy-lock. . . shy-ster. It is as if the sounds to the ear become equivalent to the mind. And of course lots of lawyers are Jewish.
The editorial confused and surprised me. Of course, I had heard the word shyster before, many times, but never put an anti-Semitic cast on it. Naif that I am, I just thought it meant a crooked lawyer. Indeed, I had heard many Jewish lawyers use the word. Now I had to find out the truth.
I looked up shyster in the best reference work I could find. I turned to A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage published in 1995 by leading legal wordsmith Bryan Garner. I was not disappointed. There, on page 806, Garner defines shyster as “a rascally” lawyer; one that is “shrewdly dishonest,” “an unscrupulous lawyer.” So far, no prejudice, except the welcome and healthy prejudice against crookedness.
As Garner points out, however, the word shyster “has long been an enigma to English-language etymologists.” But the enigma was “conclusively” solved in 1982 when one Gerald Cohen wrote Origin of the Term “Shyster.” Shyster, it turns out, was born, of all places, here in New York City. Perhaps that should come as no surprise given the number of lawyers in this town.
Cohen found no anti-Semitism in the derivation of shyster. It was coined by a Manhattan newspaper editor in 1843-1844. Cohen described how the newspaper was on a crusade against legal and political corruption then in the city. During this crusade, the editor formed the word “shyster” from the vulgar German word Scheisse (= excrement), hence “scheisser” became “shyster.” This, says respected lexicologist Garner, is the correct etymology of shyster.
The linking of shyster to Shakespeare’s Shylock is, reports Garner, only one of several mistaken hypotheses. Other erroneous theories are that the word comes from the proper name Scheuster, supposedly the name of a corrupt practitioner; from the Gaelic siostair (= barrator); and variously from words in Yiddish, Dutch and Anglo-Saxon.
None of this means that the Observer is absolutely wrong. After all, bigoted people can, and frequently do, use code words to veil their prejudice. The Jewish people have long experience with such code words.
Take the word “Zionist.” Sometimes it simply refers to someone who believes in a Jewish homeland or who settles in Israel. Coming from the mouth of a sneering U.N. delegate, however, the same word can be a masked anti-Semitic slur.
On the other hand, there is such a thing as being oversensitive and imagining prejudice when none exists. Consider the word “niggardly,” which means stingy. By itself, it is an unbiased word. But niggardly can be used today only with great risk of offending many people. In 1999, a white aid to the mayor of Washington, D.C. used the word niggardly in a conversation with two other aides. Eleven days later, he resigned as romors were spreading that he had uses a racial slur. The ear plays politically correct tricks on the brain’s common sense.
To be sure, shyster is a derogatory term. It may even be defamatory. But by itself and without more, it is derogatory and defamatory to lawyers, not Jews. Shysters come in different religions.
Some of us might think linking shyster to Shakespear’s character maligns Shylock. Although he has often been portrayed as a monstrous villain, a substantial (though minority) body of commentary views Shylock as a victim of injustice, more sinned against than sinning, as the true hero of the play, shown no mercy by Portia, and trapped by secret legalities. Rather than a fiend, Shylock strikes the minority as a tragic victim of religious and ethnic prejudice.
Much turns on the speaker’s or writer’s intent and the listener’s or reader’s response.
Last edited by monet; 08-20-2018 at 10:53 AM.
Originally Posted by kewlJI see some Donald Trump in you. (and THAT is an image I really don't want
Uh, very little,apparently.
What, Me Worry?
Merrian-Webster defines shyster as: a person who is professionally unscrupulous especially in the practice of law or politics.
But that is not limited to the practice of law or politics. My use of the word comes from my grandfather who used it regularly. His use was not specific to lawyers or politics, only a person, who acted in a shady, dishonest manner. And that is my meaning in regards to Alan. I certainly am not aware of, nor see any indication of it being used as an anti-semitic slur.
The point is that Alan might take it as an Anti-Semitic Slur. His upbringing is different than yours. If you don't like him calling you something you are offended by you shouldn't call him something that offends him.Originally Posted by kewlJ
Me... I don't give a Fuck! I'll call him a Kite and you a Mite every day of the week.
I also posted up the exact definition, origin and breakdown of the word Shyster. If you don't want to take the time to read, learn and comprehend that you saying Shyster is just as bad as him using a hurtful homophobic slur, I can not help you. You said calling him a Shyster isn't equivalent to using a homophobic hate attack but I think I have proven that it is equivalent.
Last edited by monet; 08-20-2018 at 11:08 PM.
In the late 1960's in Brooklyn the neighborhoods only were slightly segregated. I did not know/care that my best two fiends were Puerto Rican. They went to my Catholic School so there was no reason to judge them. Yes, my parents grew up in more segregated neighborhoods and nature took it course.
My father did not talk to me much (as the oldest of six kids) but he filled me in on one story that is pertinent.
He was a Lt. NYPD working in Spanish Harlem. He has been around the block as we say.
Anyhow, he relayed a story about a Jewish business man coming to the local church looking to get small bills for his business. Naturally, on Sungay afternoon, after the collections, this is a prime time.
The church deposits their money on Monday, it does not matter if it is in cash or check. The businessman wanted to pay for the cash with a check.
The businessman ultimately claimed that the check was a donation to the Catholic Church.
This is a shyster.
In the real world, this individual would have been taken care of. Then again, if the Catholic Church was on the hook, a certain family would have cleaned things up.
So, sorry to ramble about the essence of shyster, but while it can be addressed to many levels, the old world took it a higher level (not that your level, by definition, is wrong).
So y’all are basically saying V is more likely to be a shyster than Alan by the typical definition?
Fine. You guys have convinced me. No longer will I refer to Alan as a "shyster". From this point forward, I will refer to him as a dishonest, scheming, lying, manipulative con artist.
And before anyone asks what his "con" is, I will answer. His con is playing dumb. Playing everyone for the fool.
It doesn't matter what you call him. I could care less but the point is that if you are going to call him all sorts of derogatory names you shouldn't complain when he does the same thing to you.Originally Posted by kewlJ
I prefer to call him "Ace King Jack Rainbow" but Shyster works just the same in my mind!
I also like the new name Maxpen gave him combining my use of the word Martian... MendleMartian lol.
However nothing is better than that Mendlebread and how Hitler gave him the recipe or something like that!?
Didn't you come up with Mendlebread kewlJ?? If not who did?
Last edited by monet; 08-21-2018 at 12:41 AM.
I did make the mendelbread comment and it was out of line, IMO, and I apologized for it. There is no need for that kind of personal attack, IMO.Originally Posted by monet
BUT, it is fair game to point out Alan's constant dishonesty, lying, manipulating, scheming and general trolling of everyone with his "dumb" act. He is playing everyone for the fool.
To be sure, shyster is a derogatory term. It may even be defamatory. But by itself and without more, it is derogatory and defamatory to lawyers, not Jews. Shysters come in different religions.Originally Posted by mcap
Kewlj I'm just going to call you chicken because at any time you could have met me and sat at an empty blackjack table and told me the cards in play at a neighboring table.
Now, why would I possibly consider this? Most of the members of this site, AP's and even general blackjack players, know what I say is true. This technique may have been new to them, but when explained they understood, and when they learned that other players, including some that I named and others that said so themselves, track multiple tables, they know it is legit.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
It is only 2-3 members of this site, you, Singer, a couple others....the usual anti-AP crowd, that refuse to believe, what is obvious to everyone else. No demonstration would convince you. You would twist and manipulate. I don't trust you to be honest, nor do I trust you to protect my identity. I don't trust you in any way, Alan Mendelson. I find you to be a dishonest, manipulative, scheming, lying, con man. So again, back to the original question: Why would I do that? How does it benefit me?
I'd have to see it to believe it. But then, what difference does it make? It wouldn't change my game one iota.
Tracking a second table is not really something that translates to single / double deck games that you play moses. By the time you go to the trouble and make the jump, you get a round or two and it is shuffle time.Originally Posted by Moses
But players that play 6 and 8 deck shoe games, in this era, MUST get out of some of the negative counts. You just can't play through all the negatives counts like days of yesteryear. To do so, would require a huge bet spread, high variance and would become easily detectible.
Most multi-deck card counters have some sort of exit strategy for negative counts (wong-out). Now if you are going to wong out the next logical step is looking for that next game or opportunity. Why wait until you have exited the first game. That opportunity may be right there, right next to you. And if you can track that second table and make the jump to a better game (opportunity) with zero downtime, unlike a handheld game, you may get 20, 30 rounds in a positive count, +EV situation.
If you were a shoe player, I would tell you it is worth exploring. For a single / double deck player, not so much.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
