I think you sometimes give Mike too much credit. I respect Mike, especially his math abilities, I really do. I am long past my personal bad feelings for him, but he is just a guy, a strong math guy with an opinion, not some god that whatever he says....is.Originally Posted by AxelWolf
There is a guy in the BJ community goes by the handle Tarzan, based out of Atlantic City, lives very close to AC. Tarzan has successfully employed a very complex count of his own I guess invention (?) for 30 years, and made significant money doing so. It's a complex, 3 column count. I guess with his career winding down (I think he is in his 60's), Tarzan is writing a book and currently on one of the blackjack sites there is extensive conversation about it, and simulations that have to be uniquely created for this count and data collected and all that.
Now personally, I have great respect for Tarzan and have had extensive communications with him privately, BUT his approach is complete opposite of what I believe is important in today's game. I believe simplicity is more important today than ever. These complex counts are highlighting the wrong thing, playing efficiency, when it is betting correlation that really matters today. Playing efficiency mattered more 30-40 years ago.
So anyway, (back on track), while I believe this Tarzan count is severe overkill, and not the way to go in 2017, it is a legitimate count and Tarzans results of 30 years prove that. So when Tarzan was in Vegas about 2 years ago, he met with Mike to demonstrate his count. Mike dismissed it as a "parlor trick" (Mike's words), saying it was totally useless in actual play. Like I said, I am not a fan of Tarzan's approach, but it is not a parlor trick. The guy has made millions. So Mike's opinion is Mike's opinion. He is a valued Math guy and I respect him. He is not god.
Reply With Quote