My Casino back-rooming.

[kewlJ]

I don't see anything specific in my settlement agreement other than I can't discuss the amount or parties involved. I was actually wondering what would happen if I violated that because I don't see any penalty amount. I assume they could file something like breach of contract or something. Doesn't matter, I intend to honor it. I actually used this agreement to not discuss to get one final offer just a tiny bit higher that the previous offer. I think I can say that. Lol.

You are remembering correctly about MDawg. That session that Shackleford witnessed resulted in a very small win. Smaller than MDawg was reporting at that time. It was just a simple progression designed to give the best chance of a small win, and that is what happened.

In the event that would have been the one larger loss that occurs with progression systems, I think he would have disappeared and re-emerged under a new name/handle. As Axelwolf has fairly clearly pointed out, there is a very good chance this is not Mdawgs first go around. His positions and even way of writing are very similar to a previously banned baccarat player at WoV.

[PositiveVariance]

A quick note on MDAWG, so as most of us know Bacarrat's main game isn't beatable without some sort of information. (Yes, I do realize there are counting systems that can beat the main game for under $1 per hour, betting 3 and 4 figures per hand, I'm not counting this). Anyway, since he has the bankroll, he should be counting the Dragon side bet. This is very lucrative (first made public by Elliot Jackobson). MDAWG, you can run with this claim if you would like!! Just give me credit.

[Rob.Singer]

Kew, because you have so many personal problems you come across as someone who believes everyone is as stupid as you.

What did I and several others agree with when you started this hoax? THAT YOU WOULD, AFTER MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF MANY TIMES OVER AS YOU TRIPPED AND STUMBLED YOUR WAY THRU YOUR FAIRY TALE MEANT AS AN EFFORT TO FILL IN THE FINAL BLANKS OF YOUR TOTALLY CONCOCTED FORUM YEARLY-WINNING VIRTUAL PRO BJ PLAYER LIFE, conclude the story by announcing "hey guys it's been settled for BIG BUCKS, but I'm not allowed to disclose the amount or the name of the casino I took down"!

BTW Nersesian must have something on the Mayor's daughter. So far he's been able to keep the case filing from going public on the city's own website!

[Rob.Singer]

Yes, this is worth a double . Irritating kew EXTRA is always worth it.

Kew, because you have so many personal problems you come across as someone who believes everyone is as stupid as you.

What did I and several others agree with when you started this hoax? THAT YOU WOULD, AFTER MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF MANY TIMES OVER AS YOU TRIPPED AND STUMBLED YOUR WAY THRU YOUR FAIRY TALE MEANT AS AN EFFORT TO FILL IN THE FINAL BLANKS OF YOUR TOTALLY CONCOCTED FORUM YEARLY-WINNING VIRTUAL PRO BJ PLAYER LIFE, conclude the story by announcing "hey guy it's been settled for BIG BUCKS, but I'm not allowed to disclose the amount of the name of the casino I took down"!

BTW Nersesian must have something on the Mayor's daughter. So far he's been able to keep the case filing from going public on the city's own website!

[kewlJ]

Sorry Ron. Try as you might, you get no response from me until you either prove you know my name or admit that you don't. Biotch.

[kewlJ]

So lets just take a look at what is happening now. By me announcing I would not engage with the trolls on their turf, under the bridge, at GF, to continue their obsessive trolling, Singer has pretty much come crawling back here to the forum owned by Dan Druff that Singer constantly bad mouths. I am controlling the great Rob Singer like a marionette. Your welcome Ozzy.

Now Mdawg hasn't quite been able to bring himself to return here, except for a post or two. If you remember Mdawg left this forum when it became obvious he would not get the protection here that he gets from Shackleford at WoV. So while Mdawg can't bring himself to return here, he is desperately trying to work the room behind the scenes, PMing multiple members trying to influence them not to believe me and to challenge this and that. Very weak Mdawg. You are more of a little girls almost everyday.

Anyone want to weigh in on just who is out trolling the trolls?

[Rob.Singer]

Just read an interesting article online that perfectly explains why kew doesn't realize how he so often lies about "not responding" (he's like 0-85 ) to those who irritate him on forums and social media.

The poor little guy turns to excessive online life because he's very depressed with his real life. He cannot cope with the harsh realities of truth, which leads him straight down the rabbit hole of fantasy. His life is obsessive about certain people (ME in particular!) and things or events, he has a sexless life, and he is in constant need of re-affirmation, attention, and acceptance. At night, when he tries hard to go to sleep, he regularly finds himself tossing, turning, and sitting up, asking himself: WHY!?

I recognized the little weasel they were talking about almost immediately! Actually, it could be anyone of a record number of lazy, unmotivated people from his particularly abhorrent generation, who because they have no life skills, they have contracted multiple medical challenges, and they have such an unproductive life that they claim either totally moronic "gender neutrality", to be "gay", or to engage in plain old "brotherly love"....which, by the way, is easier to claim when you "say" you have a "baby brother" (wink wink!).

It isn't too far of a stretch to understand how this type of jagged lifestyle has led to kew being "forced" into being a part of so many different online hoaxes. That also explains his weakness and complete lack of willpower and dignity when it comes to trying to follow through on any of his promises and various "vows" in online forums. Of course, he stays completely blind to the fact that how his actions and disturbed personality severely undercut his want and need to be seen as some always-winning BJ card counter. It is, as they say, the price one has to pay.

Enjoy this clown while it lasts. Most like him have that extra gene that tells them to "stay away from online conflict....it will only make you look more foolish by the minute"! But we've been blessed with this limp noodle, and limp noodles like and should be whacked around as often as possible, until they finally realize their own self-loathing and agree and apologize for being such a terrible serial liar.

[coach belly]

The other time a NDA came into a discussion about AP/gambling play on these forums was when Mdawg paid Michael Shackleford to verify a short winning session

This is a lie, MDawg did not pay Shack...darkoz paid Shack.

f Shackleford did say something he would have had to post that Mdawg was playing a progression wagering type deal.

In fact Shackleford broke the NDA agreement and actually said something like that

Another lie, Shack never posted that he witnessed progression wagering, or anything like that.

He originally verified that MDawg did not do any progressive or flat betting.

He broke the NDA weeks later, when he commented about whether or not MD utilized advantage play during the session.

[kewlJ]

2 questions coach belly:

1) are you aware of What Michael Shackleford said to a number of different people privately?

2) several times when Shackleford was discussing the topic of Mdawg and his play, while he didn't reveal anything he was blocked from revealing he said something like "My opinion hasn't changed. You cannot overcome the house edge by playing a progression system." So why do you think the man would say that several times? Just out of the blue....he felt the need to say that? Or was he coming as close as he could to saying that Mdawg is/was playing some sort of progression system. As close as he could without violating the agreement?

[coach belly]

are you aware of What Michael Shackleford said to a number of different people privately?

If I were to divulge that I'm aware of such private conversations, then I would expose others' betrayal of Shack's confidence, and he would become aware of that. I'd be throwing my sources under the bus, and that's bad form.

If you're not bound by the same ethics, then please enlighten us as to what you've heard.

But there's no point in implying that you have heard something without disclosing it...it makes you look like you're full of shit.

several times when Shackleford was discussing the topic of Mdawg and his play, he said something like "My opinion hasn't changed. You cannot overcome the house edge by playing a progression system." So why do you think the man would say that several times? Just out of the blue....he felt the need to say that?

My recollection is that he did not say that several times, and he did not say it out of the blue. It was a reply within a thread. Since you quoted him above, post a link to that quote and I'll be happy to review the thread and explain to you why.[/QUOTE]

[coach belly]

2 questions

Do you acknowledge lying about this?...

Mdawg paid Michael Shackleford to verify a short winning session

Do you acknowledge lying about this?...

Mdawg was playing a progression wagering type deal.

In fact Shackleford broke the NDA agreement and actually said something like that

[PositiveVariance]

Regarding MDAWG's session that Shack witnessed:

The Progression system that most folks are aware of is the Martingale, which consist of doubling your bet after each loss. When you eventually win, you recoup all your losses from the previous hands plus being up one additional unit, which would be equivalent to your starting wager.
Looks like this:
$100-200-400-800-1600-3200-6400
Most of the regular posters of this forum are obviously aware of the Martingale and exactly how it works, but I'm sure there are some readers that are not.

The issue with MDAWG's session is he made bets from around $200 to $3500, and by having such a large "spread" it is really easy to use a "Disguised Progression".

You can do a $200, $200, $200, $800 $200 and lose all 5 bets, then win a $1,600 bet and be even.

He private messaged me a link to his post from the results of that session from WoV forum (which I had read when he originally posted it at the time, but didn't remember all the specifics).

He got off to a "good start" which really helped him. The main thing that it did (or actually didn't do) was it didn't give everyone a chance to see what he would have done if he would have gotten in a deficit. This was absolutely crucial. This is what people wanted to see as it would have shown his strategy. He was fortunate he didn't have to show it. Early on, he won a bet, and then pressed a few more times which caused him to get up early on. From then on, he was never really in any danger with any single bet of going into the negative.

Obviously this has been discussed to death on the WoV forum. I am not saying anything new.

The bottom line, is it is really easy to hide a progression system through various bet sizing.

What you will see in the results of someone who uses progression betting is many small to medium size wins for every large loss.

I have a somewhat different theory on MDAWGS results. I actually believe all or almost all of the winning and handful of losing sessions that he posted at WoV are FACTUAL. So am I saying I believe him? NO, Absolutely not! I think every 1 in 10 to 15 sessions he has a massive loss. I believe he simply is not recording this loss in his results. Ignored, as if it never happened. You have a bankroll busting loss 3-5 times per month and we all know what this does to your net results.

Ultimately, since he was never "down", we didn't get to see what he would have done but a $200-$3500 spread has over a 95% chance of having a net session win after 57 hands.

MDAWG, I know you will private message me and say "There was never no progression betting". I get that. You were never put in that position. Ultimately, as has been mentioned a million times, this was a terrible challenge by DARKOZ, at least for the purpose of proving anything, as well as for his bank balance lol. See

[kewlJ]

Answers to smelly belly: Absolutely NOT and absolutely NOT.

You think you know everything and can "spin" whatever is said any way you want. That has been your m.o., for as long as I have been aware of you. THAT is the m.o. of an internet troll.

I communicate with Mike Shackleford much more than someone like you knows. Additionally, I communicate with players that both know personally and communicate with Shackleford. That is the way the whole AP community works, especially in the context of Las Vegas.

People like you think there is bad blood between Mike and I. There isn't. Well, a little bit, but that is mostly me. For example, when I first shared this incident, it was 2 weeks after it had happened and at that time, I was still considering what if anything I was going to do. I was leaning heavily towards do nothing and then, changed my mind. I knew the hater trolls would be doing everything they could trying to sabotage the case and that is exactly what occurred. So I did two things to try to protect myself. One is I misdirected away from where this really occurred. The second is that I immediately contacted Michael Shackleford and asked him if he could do my a favor and use whatever influence he had on one troll in particular, that I was concerned about doing whatever he could to sabotage.

Shackleford readily agreed to try to help. In the end it did no good, but he tried. He may not like me sharing this but his exact response was "I have always liked you so I will do what I can". That made me more than chuckle. I think I just about peed my pants. My first thought was if this is how you treat people you like (kicking them off WoV, multiple times), how do you treat people you don't like....run them over 3 or 4 times with your car?

But Mike is different than I. He separates out stuff from the forum, better than I do. He has a number of people that refer to him as personal friends that have left or been kicked off his forum. One guy told me, he thinks Mike is actually harder on friends and people he likes. And I am in no way suggesting Mike and I are friends. We aren't. But I have always sort of liked him. I have great respect for his math and AP ability. I have a real problem that he allows and protects members pushing BS claims. As a recognized gambling math expert, I believe he has a responsibility to call that out. It is what people expect from an "expert. I guess he doesn't see it that way.

So coach belly, please don't tell me what you think Shackleford is meaning on different things he says. You don't know shit. You are on the outside looking in. Shackleford took the extraordinary step of labeling you a troll (as did Dan Druff). So don't give us this shit that you know what he is thinking or what his statements mean. You don't know shit, except how to troll and play your "gottch ya" games.

[PositiveVariance]

One more thing:
MDAWG had a "Challenge" on WoV. Basically if you could prove "Just 1" of his trip reports to be false.
My theory of him posting all his real wins and losses with the exception of a few massive losses every month or so would allow him to "WIN" his challenge if he actually had a challenger silly enough to take him up on it because all his trip reports may have actually been correct. You just wouldn't know about the few hidden bankroll busting losses.

I think it's apparent if there was a challenger, we wouldn't be seeing an ENTIRE Win/Loss statement for a calendar year.

[coach belly]

please don't tell me what you think Shackleford is meaning

LOL...you just asked me why I think he said what he said.

You didn't say "please", but you did ask.

People like you think there is bad blood between Mike and I.

I haven't contemplated your relationship with Shackleford...I don't care...nobody cares.

But you're sticking by your claim that MDawg paid Shack to witness that challenge?

And that Shack broke his NDA by posting that he witnessed MDawg use progression wagering?

If you're right, then quotes from the thread will prove you right.

[kewlJ]

Yes, you are correct, coach belly. Darkoz is the one that paid for that initial challenge. IIRC, Shackleford had no interest in being involved until it was worked out that he got paid. But do you know for sure that money hasn't exchanged hands between Mdawg and Shackleford outside of this instance?

And PV, I think you may be exactly correct with the not reporting those massive losses, part of his play. I have always sid his claims can't be "as he is telling the story".

And really, if you make that one adjustment, that there are some large massive losses that wipe out all the winning....just the way a progression system works, then everything else begins to fit. All the comps (to a losing player). All the casino personnel loving him and patting him on the back. It all works if you make that one adjustment, which by the way is what his actual W/L statements show.

[kewlJ]

One other thing here. When this all started Mdawgs claims and really the first 6 months of that first year, all the claims and daily reports of win involved bacarát play. There seems to be a shitload of bacarát guys running around think or believing or lying to themselves that progressive systems work with bacarát. They don't!

But after about 6 months Mdawg switched over to include a healthy mix of blackjack play, to where now most of his play seems to be blackjack play. Well there is a number of things that never fit with blackjack play.

First he told us he was previously banned, not backed off, but banned from blackjack play at a number of locations in Las Vegas and they had somehow reversed that decision. I have never heard of such a thing. I suppose it is possible, but I have never heard of it. The only way I would think such a ban might be reversed iis if the casino had some definitive proof, that the player or his wife maybe, was actually losing more at some other game that he was winning card counting.

The second thing about this switch to blackjack. He picked the Cosmopolitan of all places that was being so tolerant of his win, win, win blackjack play.

IF I were to list the 5 sweatiest casinos in Las Vegas for card counting, Cosmo would be in that top 5. Since most on that list would be lower limit places, if I had to list the sweatiest casino in Las Vegas for higher end card counting play, Cosmo would be in the top 2. If I had to list the single sweatiest casino on the strip for card counting, Cosmos would be it. Mdawg picked the absolute worse casino to try to convince everyone that they are tolerant of his card counting blackjack play.

Now again, if he is playing a progression but leaving out all the winnings, yes, they would tolerate that (welcome that), but that isn't what he has been claiming lately. There has been lots of talk of the remaining deck rich in high cards and more high cards remaining so he ups his bet. THAT is card counting and Cosmo is the last place on the strip going to put up with that.

It ALL boils down to if he is playing a progression betting system but simply not telling us of the big losses that wipe away all the wins.....then EVERYTHING works.

[Rob.Singer]

One other thing here. When this all started Mdawgs claims and really the first 6 months of that first year, all the claims and daily reports of win involved bacarát play. There seems to be a shitload of bacarát guys running around think or believing or lying to themselves that progressive systems work with bacarát. They don't!

But after about 6 months Mdawg switched over to include a healthy mix of blackjack play, to where now most of his play seems to be blackjack play. Well there is a number of things that never fit with blackjack play.

First he told us he was previously banned, not backed off, but banned from blackjack play at a number of locations in Las Vegas and they had somehow reversed that decision. I have never heard of such a thing. I suppose it is possible, but I have never heard of it. The only way I would think such a ban might be reversed iis if the casino had some definitive proof, that the player or his wife maybe, was actually losing more at some other game that he was winning card counting.

The second thing about this switch to blackjack. He picked the Cosmopolitan of all places that was being so tolerant of his win, win, win blackjack play.

IF I were to list the 5 sweatiest casinos in Las Vegas for card counting, Cosmo would be in that top 5. Since most on that list would be lower limit places, if I had to list the sweatiest casino in Las Vegas for higher end card counting play, Cosmo would be in the top 2. If I had to list the single sweatiest casino on the strip for card counting, Cosmos would be it. Mdawg picked the absolute worse casino to try to convince everyone that they are tolerant of his card counting blackjack play.

Now again, if he is playing a progression but leaving out all the winnings, yes, they would tolerate that (welcome that), but that isn't what he has been claiming lately. There has been lots of talk of the remaining deck rich in high cards and more high cards remaining so he ups his bet. THAT is card counting and Cosmo is the last place on the strip going to put up with that.

It ALL boils down to if he is playing a progression betting system but simply not telling us of the big losses that wipe away all the wins.....then EVERYTHING works.

Quoting you, upon being constantly mocked and criticized for the weakness and lack of discipline you exhibit for your countless lies about leaving the forums for good and not responding to those you like to label as trolls: "WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF YOURS WHAT I DO!?"

Therefore, WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF YOURS WHETHER MDAWG WINS OR LOSES, REPORTS ACCURATELY, IF HE USES A PROGRESSION, OR WHERE HE PLAYS?

You see kew, this is just another example as to why you're seen as a flaming hypocrite. Then you try to make believe you have his win/loss records from the Cosmo, as given to you at your doorstep by unnamed MGM Execs

Do you ever tire of lying, being a nosey old lady, and posting from what appears to be a forum-posting sweatshop? And how many times are you gonna look stupid by deflecting away from Coach's tough comments and questions with your weasely wordsmithing?

You DO know nearly everyone enjoys watching you make a fool of yourself with this stuff, right??

By the way, destroying another of your lies--Wizard looks at you as an annoying idiot.

[soxfan]

It's possible to win well and regular at the baccarats, long term without having to use any wild progressions style and without having to cards count any of the zany sides-bet. As for the m-dawg, the boy claim to utilize the advanatged-plays, hinted at some sort of edges-sortings or some such, hey hey.

[PositiveVariance]

It's possible to win well and regular at the baccarats, long term without having to use any wild progressions style and without having to cards count any of the zany sides-bet. As for the m-dawg, the boy claim to utilize the advanatged-plays, hinted at some sort of edges-sortings or some such, hey hey.

Yes, it's possible. Likely? No. Long term? Very unlikely. The more hands you play, the more unlikely it becomes.
MDAWG is not edge sorting. He is a guy that believes in "Pressing Bets" and "Reading Shoes". This is not math based stuff. Remember, the cards have no "memory". As Norm W. Likes to say, it's "Voodoo".

MDAWG is a rich PLOPPY.

Ploppies come in all forms.