Well....
Alan certainly set out to discredit me. And he was not truthful in some of the ways he did that, like the intentional blurry pictures of blackjack tables meant to show that a person could not see the next table.
But all in all, I think and hope his attempt to discredit me wasn't intentional deceit. I hope it was more about it just didn't seem logical to him, a non player and he expressed that in a bit of an over zealous manner. I don't think Alan is a bad guy at his core. I hold no grudge and actually like Alan AND he shared some very useful information in the last year from which I benefited financially, so Alan is ok in my book.
Eliot's math wasn't specifically based on MDawg's play, but his big player story was that his guy consistently won...10s of millions over a period of almost 3 years.
MDawg has stated that he's been playing since 2018.
There's no point in assuming that Eliot's guy played less than MDawg, unless you're trying to fit an agenda.
But your missing my point about your view of Eliot's story.
You believe Eliot's big player story, but you don't believe MDawg's story, when they are equivalent stories.
The difference is that Eliot's guy bet much more and won much more than MDawg, but it's the same story.
Eliot didn't disclose his guy's name, but if Eliot wrote "the big player called himself MDawg" then would the story be all a big lie?
Not dealing in hypotheticals. You get Eliot to disclose that the "big player" was MDawg and then we can look into the specifics of the situation.
The more important thing I took from Eliot's story is that the casino was not just going to let a player just keep winning and winning and winning and then give high end freebies on top of that. In this case they called in some experts and were convinced it would turn around shortly which it did.
But both MDawg and you have indicated the casinos are fine with a player winning and winning and willing to still comp everything. Anyone that knows and understands this business knows that was nonsense.
You are out of your mind. I am the one due an apology, but I don't require it. I am fine with Alan.
CB, you cherry picked and left out the key part of the analysis, namely: yeah, someone can win if they are an AP and play with a demonstrable advantage against the casino, and by report MDawg does not play with an advantage.Originally Posted by coach belly
Here's what Eliot wrote:
"The winning is definitely possible. Playing a winning system, given what he has disclosed, is what is not possible. It's all about having information, and nothing that the poster has said at any point in any post they have made indicates that they have any information beyond what a recreational gambler has. That's all you need to know to dismiss everything they say about having a winning system. As for winning, that's irrelevant."
What, Me Worry?
Are you fucking shitting me?Originally Posted by coach belly
It's at the top of the page when you first come on to the Las Vegas section.
It says "Sticky: Forum Rules - please read!
Started by Dan Druff, 04-12-2020 05:09 PM"
Let me guess: you never read them!
Of course you didn't!
I think you have your forums confused; the wiz might care about the "privacy" issue you are bleating about but Dan could give two shits about it.
As it is NOT a violation of the printed rules, not a violation of any other rule Dan Druff may have made up along the way it is therefore NOT AN ISSUE ON THIS SITE.
You want to whine about the small shit, go hit up the Wiz; but over here your straw man just combusts spontaneously.
Last edited by MisterV; 01-25-2021 at 03:44 PM.
What, Me Worry?
Every one /everyone knows it all; yet, no thing /nothing is truly known by any one /anyone. Similarly, the suckers think that they win, but, the house always wins, unless to hand out an even worse beating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsa6ojQcYXQ
Garnabby + OppsIdidItAgain + ThomasClines (or TomasHClines) + The Grim Reaper + LMR + OneHitWonder (or 1HitWonder, 1Hit1der) + Bill Yung ---> GOTTLOB1, or GOTTLOB = Praise to God!
Blog at https://garnabby.blogspot.com/
Eliot never stated that the casino was not just going to let a player just keep winning and winning and winning and then give high end freebies on top of that...his story did not mention anything about freebies and comps.
Eliot explained that MDawg's winning claims are not math-defying impossible claims.
But you still insist that they are.
Eliot tells a "winning at baccarat" story that you accept as truthful,
MDawg tells an equivalent story, and you label his story impossible and call him a liar.
You misunderstand what Eliot is stating.
He states that a playing a winning system is not possible.
But winning as MDawg has claimed is certainly possible.
Eliot explains it that post, and with his big player story, that winning consistently over a period of 3 years at baccarat is possible.
You're insisting that it's not possible...but you're obviously wrong about that.
KJ, I get your point, I think, but then again why would rain inhibit you from going to the casinos to ply you craft?Originally Posted by kewlJ
I assume it's likely a "mood thing" as opposed to a real impediment.
What, Me Worry?
OMG, it isn't just an act....YOU ARE retarted.
Winning over 3 years.
a,) Guy makes an annual overnight trips for a total of 3 trips, maybe 10 hours of play.
b.) Guy makes 12 trips a year for several days at a time.
c.) Guy (maybe someone we know) makes a number of annual trips for weeks and months at a time.
Are all equal? of course not. So don't talk to me about 3 years of winning.
I never claimed that posting the contents of a private message without the sender's permission is a violation of VCT rules...that's your strawman argument.
But it's definitely a character issue...as a general principle, it's likely that Dan would not approve of that behavior.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)