KJ BJ expert?

[kewlJ]

Yea, I know.. your brain breaks into 2 things and you sit around thinking about life why the sub-brain just counts magically. It is also why you can count 3 tables at once.

While I'm sure it becomes a lot easier with time and second nature (duh, obviously) - you still have to occupy your mind constantly with the count. You can sit there and tell us how easy it is for Mr BJ-master but whatevers. I doubt you can count just fine and think 100% on other things.

This is you doubling/tripling down on something you know absolutely nothing about. AinQ, you really have KJ derangement syndrome mentioned earlier. If I say something you will fight me on it, no matter what it is, no matter how little you know about what is being discussed. hell, I think we are to the point that you will fight me when you know 100% you are wrong.

Take the tracking of a second table that you just mentioned (just about a thing of the past now, as there are few situations where it would work). YOU and others continue to mock this. But when this discussion came about several other blackjack players weighed in at different places that they too had done some form of this. Richard Munchkin, Don Schlesinger, A known BJ player that was here for a short while, and has asked me not to use his name on this forum and I believe a couple more. I think RS_ the known blackjack player from WOV and here (shortly) said he had done so. (RS_ used to go by rolling stoned. Don't confuse him with Rob Singer). If Kim Lee shows up again, I will ask him. I will bet he did some version of this.

So numerous other real and experienced blackjack players have done this also. And I didn't copy anything from anyone, because we didn't even know of anyone else until discussion after I had mentioned it.

AinQ, can you really not see how KJ obsessive you have become (just like a few others) If I say the grass is green, you will fight me.

Oh, this is just something that can never be proven nor can you demonstrate.

Just like you counting 3 tables. You can insist you are superman counter or whatever the fuck but it doesn't mean you're more right. Of COURSE you'll fight for whatever you claimed and never back down. You have something no one else can prove. Even when it can be demonstrated you made it up and everyone else is laughing - you don't back down.

Come'on Kewl. No one takes you seriously and very few will. ZenKing?

I have seen nothing to suggest you even have the capability of being honest to yourself as far as your mental ability while keeping a running count.

There is no derangement here, we just know you're full of shit about so much. Not too bright. etc etc. Counting Cards seems like it'd really blow as far as a longterm profession. For many many reasons - many of which are the same reasons people don't believe your story as a whole.

I NEVER mocked tracking a second table. At some point you suggested you could and did on occasion track 3.. I'm not why you keep switching it around but it is like everything with you - disengenious and only meant to try and reinforce this life narrative you present. Reality has no value to you when on the forums. You went with 2 then upped it to 3 and people were like wtf lol. Same pattern you've demonstrated repeatedly. Now when I bring it up and say 3 tables, you respond as if I said 2 when it is very clear. You live in fantasyland. Sorry.

Stop with the 3 tables. That is just you trying to make something out of nothing. The technique was about tracking a second table while playing one. But when you can do that as many real and experienced card counters have, then yes you could track a 3rd table for a very short time under the perfect conditions. And THAT is what I said. I think I did it maybe twice, maybe 3 times. the other two tables one on each side had to be starting (after shuffle point) about the same time. You could track for a round, possibly two and then you drop the worse of the tables and continue tracking only the second until you decide which is the better opportunity.

Account, even non-card counters are familiar with the MIT story and movie aren't they? That "spotter/call in approach" used by the MIT team and many teams dating back to ken Uston and AL Francesco, who is credited with the play. You have heard of this right? Well the spotters were tracking as much as 4-5 tables at one time, looking for that favorable count to call in a player. You don't even need the specific count! You just need to be sure it is enough that the table is significantly +EV.

Well playing one table and tracking a second is nothing compared to tracking 4-5 tables. A real and experienced player can do this in his sleep almost.