Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 208

Thread: Note to Dan: Rob Singer and Dan Druff Sharing Account at Gambling Forums

  1. #141
    Does Casino Verite allow an evaluation of Scarne's (or Moses' derivative system) counting system (https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...l=1#post153696) to see if it gets above the 1.5% player edge threshold ? I'm guessing no counting system does. I'm also guessing that someone would have code their own program to make that evaluation which of course wouldn't be worth it.

  2. #142
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Does Casino Verite allow an evaluation of Scarne's (or Moses' derivative system) counting system (https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...l=1#post153696) to see if it gets above the 1.5% player edge threshold ? I'm guessing no counting system does. I'm also guessing that someone would have code their own program to make that evaluation which of course wouldn't be worth it.
    Not to my knowledge unless things have changed. But I would check with Norm Wattenberger. Norm is very good and fast with customer support and questions.

    What is the significants of a 1.5% player edge?

  3. #143
    Originally Posted by TheGrimReaper View Post
    Just a bit o6 shit in an essentially shitty book he stumbled across, but just couldn't get out o6 his drunken head. To go through all o6 that, but, still never really or actually prove anything.
    ---> Beginnings: Geomancy, Builders' Rites and Electional Astrology in the European Tradition.

    https://anagram-solver.net/%20Justab...g?partial=true


    With 6's for the three f's, again. Anyway, the poor boy just can't get the shit out of his head. Over and over with different numerals. Anybody have their slide rule out? Even super-blowhard KJ, trying to hitch his cart to MC's, could only put up "someone else's" figures. Ha.

    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    IN a games like video poker and keno it's easy to figure expected value. Keno is the easiest to figure because the probabilities are fixed.

    The equation is probability times payoff. Two-spot is easy example

    total combinations 80 X 79/2 X 1 = 3,160

    combinations that make the two spot 20 X 19/2 X 1 = 190

    3160/190 = 16.63158

    If the two-spot pays 12 for 1:

    15/16.63158 = 90.19%

    So the EV for the player is 90.19%

    The EV for the house is 109.81%

    Keno is easy to figure because it's easy to calculate the probabilites against the payoffs. With the typical slot machine the public generally doesn't know exactly what the payback is. Except we know what the parameters are, somewhere between 75% and 100%.

    But every line pay that can be hit has a definite probability. Mixed Bars might be 1 in 20, Single Bars 1 in 50, etc. The public generally doesn't know those probabilities but there is a definite EV there.

    It's the same with sportsbetting. Against a -110 line you have to win 52.4% to break even. So if you are looking to turn a profit then you must limit your bets to only those side you think have a greater than 52.4% chance of covering.

    Probability theory definitely comes into play here. You think it's probable that team A has a greater than 52.4% chance of covering. Exactly what that probability is....is hard to quantify. But it's definitely there. Expected Value is definitely there.

    2 hours before game time the line is sitting on 7. But an hour before game the Salt Lake City wood choppers show up and hammer the favorite as they always do. The line moves to 7.5, then 8, then 8.5. It reaches 9 about 20 minutes before game.

    I go up and take the dog +9. On a typical game I might not know exactly what the EV is but I know it's a hell of a lot better than the EV of those that took the dog at +7.

    I did quite well with this method when I was there. And it don't matter what the hell redietz thinks about it.
    Yeah, old Mickey went on bit about his challenge, at https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...24500+midnight . Back, then, the self-proclaimed all-time great slot pro went by the handle, SlobDinger, after he was initially banned here. At least I never ran back to old Druff, Druff to beg to be reinstated. Now I wonder about how many times he similarly begged the head clown of Vegas. Oh, I came across a post of Mickey's about my simply telling a new guy what I thought about gambling, at https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...ll=1#post56273 . Druff, Druff used to ban me a lot, in the early days, over dumb shit like that. And, Crimm calling me a troll, which ties in with the anagram with gematria about the internet group called Anonymous. https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...ll=1#post77796 . Used to piss him off a lot, until he put me on ignore. Most of us have appeared in his signature line at one time or another. One time, I put his in mine, about get the motherfucker troll on. Druff, Druff deleted it, again without warning. Now Crimm making out that lots make a lot more money than him.

    Okay, to finish off the Redietz stuff. I experimented a bit with his number of posts. The anagram-with-gematria solver settled in on 7,885 , with things steadily thus progressing from 7,863 , when I first ran it on his "passing". Approaching some sort of super-strange limit, say, the "Redietz parapsychological factor", RPF ("rip off") for short, with each and all of the digits included. Gosh, now I recall Redietz' supposed history with debunking thus stuff in the real world.

    It's shut down, Redietz, 4t post seven thous4nd, eight hundred eighty-five, for t4x ev4sion.
    --->

    Ten Nine Eight Seven Six Five Four Three Two One.

    Here's Where the Story Ends (Tin Tin Out song).

    President of the University of Tennessee.


    https://anagram-solver.net/It%27s%20....?partial=true

    Which lets me to wonder what happened to the two missing posts, from old Red, from Tennesse. Something to ponder until my return.


    Double P.S.S. 7885 = 19*(6-1)*1*83 ---> 1961, and the 183rd day of non-leap years, as July 2. As well, there's, the 7,885th prime, 80,599 = (-10,000 + 90,000 + 600 - 1) ---> 1961. Go figure.


    TheGrimReaper
    TheGrimReaper is invisible
    Gold
    TheGrimReaper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Posts
    173
    Last edited by TheGrimReaper; 02-03-2023 at 11:53 AM.
    Drug Rehabilitation + Haliburton County for the local thus clinics. The one in Haliburton town temporarily closed yields the closest, 4cast. 137 posts at NetVoid's forum, + 184 here =321.0, to overlap 3456 at the 3's, as the dimensions from 0 to 6, four by four.bb

    The unused, Zodiac bits: 'dakadu, Lake+151?s (164 char. max) seed the final two lines of the anagram solver -of lies/revenge. Franc Baconis for the capital L yields 141=69+ᘔᘖ; 397=[(10-6+9-1)^3-(1+ᘔ+ᘖ+1)^3].

    Thanks. CIA.0!

    Ha.

  4. #144
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Does Casino Verite allow an evaluation of Scarne's (or Moses' derivative system) counting system (https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...l=1#post153696) to see if it gets above the 1.5% player edge threshold ? I'm guessing no counting system does. I'm also guessing that someone would have code their own program to make that evaluation which of course wouldn't be worth it.
    Not to my knowledge unless things have changed. But I would check with Norm Wattenberger. Norm is very good and fast with customer support and questions.

    What is the significants of a 1.5% player edge?
    Thanks. There's no significance to that edge other than I don't recall a counting system that can break that threshold. I don't own Casino Verite software, I was just curious.

  5. #145
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Thanks. There's no significance to that edge other than I don't recall a counting system that can break that threshold. I don't own Casino Verite software, I was just curious.
    Here is the way I think about it. If you read books from back in the 80's or for those that played that time, the general consensus was that a player could get somewhere between a 1-2% advantage using card counting. And that is the time that different counts mattered somewhat. A stronger count, especially with a decent single or double deck game could make a difference and push a player toward the 1.5-2% range.

    But those days of those games are gone. Scarne died in 1985, so whatever he was doing or players like him with regards to more complicated type counts was for the games of 1980. It just doesn't translate to 2020's. That is what I have tried to tell Moses and people that want to still push those ideas like Jstat.

    There were 2 big changes that changed everything. First, was going to the 6 and 8 deck shoe games. This means the count frequencies for any count higher than TC +1 or so is pretty drastically reduced. If a player puts his max bet out at lets say a TC of +4, he is going to see less than half those opportunities as what he used to.

    The second big change was the dealer hit soft 17. On paper it looks like this adds about .2% to the house edge and that seems manageable. But the effect on a card counter is much worse because it slides all of the true count frequencies just a bit further. So lets say with a house edge of .45, a player had an even game just below the TC of +1 and a +EV game just above +1. The "extra house edge" slides those numbers further away, so now the break even point is above +1 and the +EV point at about +1.5. Everything slides away from you just a bit. So the point you are break even is fewer counts than before, the point you are +EV is further away and fewer frequencies than before. The point in which you were at a 1% advantage, further away and fewer times you will see that count. Everything slides about half a true count away and you sill see fewer of those counts.

    The effect of this is with a play all approach it is very difficult to get a 1% advantage, much less anything over that. I mean if you use a huge spread, 1-50, or 1-100, maybe, but good luck lasting more than a few minutes playing that way.

    But there is something players can do to offset those negative changes and that is to exit at least some of the negative counts, the worst of them. This changes the true count frequencies back towards the player because he isn't playing the worst of the counts. This can push you back towards 1% total advantage, even over with an aggressive bet spread and ramp. BUT most players don't like to play this way, exiting games and moving around. And of course, you can't do it everywhere.

  6. #146
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Thanks. There's no significance to that edge other than I don't recall a counting system that can break that threshold. I don't own Casino Verite software, I was just curious.
    Here is the way I think about it. If you read books from back in the 80's or for those that played that time, the general consensus was that a player could get somewhere between a 1-2% advantage using card counting. And that is the time that different counts mattered somewhat. A stronger count, especially with a decent single or double deck game could make a difference and push a player toward the 1.5-2% range.

    But those days of those games are gone. Scarne died in 1985, so whatever he was doing or players like him with regards to more complicated type counts was for the games of 1980. It just doesn't translate to 2020's. That is what I have tried to tell Moses and people that want to still push those ideas like Jstat.

    There were 2 big changes that changed everything. First, was going to the 6 and 8 deck shoe games. This means the count frequencies for any count higher than TC +1 or so is pretty drastically reduced. If a player puts his max bet out at lets say a TC of +4, he is going to see less than half those opportunities as what he used to.

    The second big change was the dealer hit soft 17. On paper it looks like this adds about .2% to the house edge and that seems manageable. But the effect on a card counter is much worse because it slides all of the true count frequencies just a bit further. So lets say with a house edge of .45, a player had an even game just below the TC of +1 and a +EV game just above +1. The "extra house edge" slides those numbers further away, so now the break even point is above +1 and the +EV point at about +1.5. Everything slides away from you just a bit. So the point you are break even is fewer counts than before, the point you are +EV is further away and fewer frequencies than before. The point in which you were at a 1% advantage, further away and fewer times you will see that count. Everything slides about half a true count away and you sill see fewer of those counts.

    The effect of this is with a play all approach it is very difficult to get a 1% advantage, much less anything over that. I mean if you use a huge spread, 1-50, or 1-100, maybe, but good luck lasting more than a few minutes playing that way.

    But there is something players can do to offset those negative changes and that is to exit at least some of the negative counts, the worst of them. This changes the true count frequencies back towards the player because he isn't playing the worst of the counts. This can push you back towards 1% total advantage, even over with an aggressive bet spread and ramp. BUT most players don't like to play this way, exiting games and moving around. And of course, you can't do it everywhere.
    Thank you. A rough way to make an easy living as they say. I agree that Wonging out of negative counts is a great way to go and used to do it many years ago before I discovered machine play - I've been a machine player for quite some time and have no regrets. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the current machine play climate will last indefinitely. It seems like it will, since not only traditional companies but new upstart companies keep pumping out persistent state machines as I type this. It would have been fun to see what the edge is on a ratio system (versus modern counting systems - with both applied to the single deck, stay on soft 17 games) like the Scarne or Moses derivative, but since no one has already done an analysis, it will remain a mystery as it has only entertainment value from a historical perspective.

  7. #147
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post

    You highlight real insinuating I’m not ? I got 600k in a bag currently sitting in a hotel room at a gambling destination that I’m sure Dan can verify that says otherwise you fraud. I’m here to call you out. Think I don’t know you ? Lol what I open book you are. You doxed your entire life and family online for years idiot
    So let’s talk about robs gambling career. Do you have any idea how much money rob needed to play the levels of Vp he did for all those years ? You can’t be this stupid to believe the guy was unsuccessful.

    You never had the roll to play one tenth the volume he did at those stakes. This includes the late Alan M. Both of those men were and are more successful then you will ever be.

    Seed, here's the issue I have with your arguments.

    About 35 years ago, a reporter for the Pottsville Republican (which has a Pulitzer under its belt) interviewed me prior to the NFL playoffs, as papers occasionally have done. I had a bang-up year in the Wise Guys Contest and overall, winning 60-some percent of my games. And I was on a really good multi-year streak, as tallied in "Tipsters or Gypsters?" which was published in Las Vegas. Anyway, the reporter asked me how successful I had been, and I answered I had won 60% ATS for that year and x% for three years and y% for five years and finished first in the Wise Guys and second in Bally's College Contest and all this. Later in the interview, he came back and asked me the same question, and I expanded on the answer. And then at the conclusion of the interview, he asked me the same question again, and the light bulb finally went on. He wanted me to answer how much income I had, which I declined to do.

    My point is that when you use the word "successful," Seed, you and that reporter are talking about income or wealth or something that is not the general definition of "successful." If you're a whiz-bang AP and you consider yourself "successful" because you have x number of dollars, then any Chinese billionaire's son who plops themselves in Las Vegas next week and makes more money than you is "more successful" than you by your definition. I find this absurd.

    Before you go on some rant than records and expertise don't translate into real "success," bear in mind I recently finished living in the same multi-million-dollar house as a dude who pumped through a million playing blackjack in 24 hours or something like that. I was basically doing the Magnum P.I. thing on Higgins' estate. Now this guy listened to me and worked with me, and I worked with him. So does where I lived or what I drove (occasionally a Lambo) mean I am "successful?" Or does doing that stuff for a few years not count? My girlfriend and I were staying in the master bedroom, by the way, so no, we were not in the servants' quarters.

    Your definition of "success" is messed up, Seed. I've worked with presidents of companies, CFO's, a vice-president of Boeing, and Billy Walters. Success is being able to do what you want to be able to do, at a high level, and have other "successful" people recognize and respect you. It ain't exclusively or even primarily about money.

    I think this is what has Singer and many haters on tilt when it comes to gambling. They are "successful" in life but have failed miserably gambling. They can't take it. It's beyond them that they aren't gambling savants or don't have specific kinds of discipline. In Rob's heyday, he had all kinds of behavioral problems in Las Vegas. He doesn't even remember that he shared those problems with people.

    You worked for people you perceive are important so what. You know some connected guys so what. True success is helping others obtain their dream. I’ve don’t that many times over and continue to do it. Money is just a way to keep score.


    Pottsville is a shit hole, and so is Grantvile. That shitty restaurant you told me some months back to visit and ask about you was terrible. They also didn’t know you. I just so happen to be coming through that area and decided to ask about you. Now we find out you cant even pay property tax ? So I guess everything you are writing is indeed False. Much like Gunplay Kew the great gay Gatsby.

    Listen I don’t care really that you guys post all these fairytales on these forums. It’s entertainment for you I guess. Keep at it just know you guys don’t really fool anyone. No one believes your tall tales.

  8. #148
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Thanks. There's no significance to that edge other than I don't recall a counting system that can break that threshold. I don't own Casino Verite software, I was just curious.
    Here is the way I think about it. If you read books from back in the 80's or for those that played that time, the general consensus was that a player could get somewhere between a 1-2% advantage using card counting. And that is the time that different counts mattered somewhat. A stronger count, especially with a decent single or double deck game could make a difference and push a player toward the 1.5-2% range.

    But those days of those games are gone. Scarne died in 1985, so whatever he was doing or players like him with regards to more complicated type counts was for the games of 1980. It just doesn't translate to 2020's. That is what I have tried to tell Moses and people that want to still push those ideas like Jstat.

    There were 2 big changes that changed everything. First, was going to the 6 and 8 deck shoe games. This means the count frequencies for any count higher than TC +1 or so is pretty drastically reduced. If a player puts his max bet out at lets say a TC of +4, he is going to see less than half those opportunities as what he used to.

    The second big change was the dealer hit soft 17. On paper it looks like this adds about .2% to the house edge and that seems manageable. But the effect on a card counter is much worse because it slides all of the true count frequencies just a bit further. So lets say with a house edge of .45, a player had an even game just below the TC of +1 and a +EV game just above +1. The "extra house edge" slides those numbers further away, so now the break even point is above +1 and the +EV point at about +1.5. Everything slides away from you just a bit. So the point you are break even is fewer counts than before, the point you are +EV is further away and fewer frequencies than before. The point in which you were at a 1% advantage, further away and fewer times you will see that count. Everything slides about half a true count away and you sill see fewer of those counts.

    The effect of this is with a play all approach it is very difficult to get a 1% advantage, much less anything over that. I mean if you use a huge spread, 1-50, or 1-100, maybe, but good luck lasting more than a few minutes playing that way.

    But there is something players can do to offset those negative changes and that is to exit at least some of the negative counts, the worst of them. This changes the true count frequencies back towards the player because he isn't playing the worst of the counts. This can push you back towards 1% total advantage, even over with an aggressive bet spread and ramp. BUT most players don't like to play this way, exiting games and moving around. And of course, you can't do it everywhere.
    Just because you regurgitate everything you read that someone else wrote doesn’t make you real. Successful gamblers don’t spend all this time writing essays on basically anonymous messages boards.

  9. #149
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    Just because you regurgitate everything you read that someone else wrote doesn’t make you real.
    You haters that claim I regurgitate or plagiarize... show me where? I have said this every time one of you assholes says this and no one has been able to do so....NOT ONCE. Not that there couldn't be a discussion about how dealer hit soft 17 changed the game for card counters, but I have never seen it so show me.

    And the same with tracking two tables. I have never seen a discussion of tracking a second table while playing at a different table, except for those conversations I am involved in. NOT ONCE. Not in any book. Not on any website.

    So prove this accusation or just shut the fuck up, asshole.

  10. #150
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Why don't you, the self-proclaimed White Knight of gambling, attack those actual $cammer$ with the same ferocity? Don't answer; I already know; they won't interact with you, so you will be deprived of the one thing that you claim all of this is about for Rob: attention.

    This forum is nothing other than a few headless chickens and a few spectators who can't help but constantly gasp in wonder at the fact that the headless chickens are still alive and still running around.

    And, all these years later, you're still giving Rob what he wants. MaxPen eventually figured out that it's not worth it; that nobody can beat Rob in this particular endurance game---took him long enough.
    MaxPen leaving had nothing to do with Singer, nor did it have anything to do with Mickeycrimm. He had another concern, that anyone that knows the situation understands. If it wasn't for that, he would still be here giving both Singer and Mickeycrimm shit. It was only 6 months ago, that Maxpen wasted almost half a day down at South Point just to prove that Singer would reneg and wouldn't show to a meetup that Singer proposed. What you think MaxPen has some kind of epiphany all of the sudden? There was simply another situation, unrelated to Singer or Crimm, that Maxpen rightfully determined wasn't risk/benefit wise to continue here at this time.

    I have no problem with you Mission, always liked you, but you are barking bullshit now. I am not the white knight of gambling. Never claimed to be. I don't go searching out people to expose as frauds or scammers, so I am not going to go searching on youtube or someplace that I don't participate. But if I am on a gambling forum and someone makes claims that can't be, mathematically or defying the way things work, I am going to say so. That is my right Mission. Who the fuck are you to tell me what should or shouldn't be important to me?

    Edit - add on: Oh, and if you think I give a shit about my "stock", honestly Mission, you are dumber than ***** (I was going to take a shot at someone but she really don't deserve that so I have refrained....sort of ). I stopped caring about my "stock" way back on Norm's blackjack forum when I called out the leading poster (by volume) about a claim that was just bullshit, raising the ire of the forum owner, Norm. And that very person later admitted I was right.

    I just don't care about my "stock". I am not selling anything. If people think down on me because I call out some clown making claims that can't be, that is on them, not me. As an experience player and AP, I have that right if that is what I want to do.

    Why don’t you post what happened to max. Explain why he’s MIA even in Vegas. Bet you won’t

  11. #151
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    Just because you regurgitate everything you read that someone else wrote doesn’t make you real.
    You haters that claim I regurgitate or plagiarize... show me where? I have said this every time one of you assholes says this and no one has been able to do so....NOT ONCE. Not that there couldn't be a discussion about how dealer hit soft 17 changed the game for card counters, but I have never seen it so show me.

    And the same with tracking two tables. I have never seen a discussion of tracking a second table while playing at a different table, except for those conversations I am involved in. NOT ONCE. Not in any book. Not on any website.

    So prove this accusation or just shut the fuck up, asshole.

    You don’t make jack shit buddy. Trust me I know exactly what you do. You made enough enemies in Vegas that the information flows like water about you, and baby bro.

  12. #152
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    Just because you regurgitate everything you read that someone else wrote doesn’t make you real.
    You haters that claim I regurgitate or plagiarize... show me where? I have said this every time one of you assholes says this and no one has been able to do so....NOT ONCE. Not that there couldn't be a discussion about how dealer hit soft 17 changed the game for card counters, but I have never seen it so show me.

    And the same with tracking two tables. I have never seen a discussion of tracking a second table while playing at a different table, except for those conversations I am involved in. NOT ONCE. Not in any book. Not on any website.

    So prove this accusation or just shut the fuck up, asshole.

    You don’t make jack shit buddy. Trust me I know exactly what you do. You made enough enemies in Vegas that the information flows like water about you, and baby bro.
    Because tracking a second table is worth literally zero and can’t be done efficiently while playing. It’s a waste of time and effort. Fancy play syndrome at it’s finest. In your case fancy play fantasy, because you never even attempted to do such things. More lies

  13. #153
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    You don’t make jack shit buddy. Trust me I know exactly what you do. You made enough enemies in Vegas that the information flows like water about you, and baby bro.
    Another lie. BUT, go for it! It is comical to read the shit you come up with about me and others because you are so obsessed and filled with hate.

  14. #154
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    You don’t make jack shit buddy. Trust me I know exactly what you do. You made enough enemies in Vegas that the information flows like water about you, and baby bro.
    Another lie. BUT, go for it! It is comical to read the shit you come up with about me and others because you are so obsessed and filled with hate.

    Hate ? Lol how many people have you helped build 6 and 7 figure bankrolls ? Once again I’m willing to bet this as well loser.

    I hate you because of the lies you spread and the shit you talk.

  15. #155
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    You don’t make jack shit buddy. Trust me I know exactly what you do. You made enough enemies in Vegas that the information flows like water about you, and baby bro.
    Another lie. BUT, go for it! It is comical to read the shit you come up with about me and others because you are so obsessed and filled with hate.
    I will send you some chocolate dicks in a box on your birthday. Don’t fuck them all at once and split that ass wide open like your bro does. Fake ass lier

  16. #156
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    Because tracking a second table is worth literally zero and can’t be done efficiently while playing. It’s a waste of time and effort. Fancy play syndrome at it’s finest. In your case fancy play fantasy, because you never even attempted to do such things. More lies
    I have no idea what you know or do as far as AP, but this proves you know nothing about card counting. Tracking a second table or multiple tables, means you will positive counts and in particular max bet counts and opportunities twice as much (or more) in the same time period. Anyone who can't figure that out is just not very smart. It is a simple concept. Why do you think all many successful teams used "spotters" to track multiple tables, calling in the big player or better, when they identified a good positive count?

    Tracking a second table while playing one is the exact same concept, it is just the player doing so (when the opportunity is there) is playing both roles, spotter and big player.

    But I am not going to argue with someone who is either an idiot or playing an idiot.

  17. #157
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post

    I will send you some chocolate dicks in a box on your birthday. Don’t fuck them all at once and split that ass wide open like your bro does. Fake ass lier
    case in point. You don't know shit and are just full of nonsense.

  18. #158
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by Seedvalue View Post
    Because tracking a second table is worth literally zero and can’t be done efficiently while playing. It’s a waste of time and effort. Fancy play syndrome at it’s finest. In your case fancy play fantasy, because you never even attempted to do such things. More lies
    I have no idea what you know or do as far as AP, but this proves you know nothing about card counting. Tracking a second table or multiple tables, means you will positive counts and in particular max bet counts and opportunities twice as much (or more) in the same time period. Anyone who can't figure that out is just not very smart. It is a simple concept. Why do you think all many successful teams used "spotters" to track multiple tables, calling in the big player or better, when they identified a good positive count?

    Tracking a second table while playing one is the exact same concept, it is just the player doing so (when the opportunity is there) is playing both roles, spotter and big player.

    But I am not going to argue with someone who is either an idiot or playing an idiot.


    Here we go again with your bull shit.

    Teams using spotters to identify good spots is utilized effectively.

    You counting a second table 20 ft away while playing is not.

    You don’t do this it’s a lie.

    Bet me on anything you feel confident in. At this point I would take action that I could literally beat you at anything. That’s how fake you are to me gunz.

  19. #159
    Originally Posted by mcap View Post
    The silly thing about all of this is that Dan Druff isn’t even a real person!
    The silly thing about all of this is mcap uses the same tampon for a year.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  20. #160
    I'm sorry you got all offended by a simple question Mickey.
    Mickey Crimm is a poser pro. He rides around in a moto-wheelchair telling slot hustlers he's Mickey Crimm, and some are in awe of a "forum legend" and show him the plays.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 29 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 29 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Note to Dan Druff
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 01-23-2023, 10:37 AM
  2. Dan Druff Quote
    By kewlJ in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-13-2021, 03:01 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-30-2019, 10:37 PM
  4. Dan Druff Retires From Gambling
    By mickeycrimm in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 143
    Last Post: 12-24-2018, 07:32 PM
  5. Dan Druff
    By kewlJ in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 08-02-2018, 01:59 PM

Posting Permissions

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