Electronic Blackjack - hit after doubling down.

[kewlJ]

In the end, I shared a play that we "stumbled on" and executed, even traveling several months to do so. And the trolls and KJ haters trolled and hated, as they always do, despite that several of the real players/Ap's acknowledging that these plays and types of "glitches" are out there at times.

So what else is new! That is what this forum is now.

[MDawg]

In the end

you once again outed yourself with yet another fabrication.

[kewlJ]

you once again outed yourself

The only person I have outed over the past few years is you Mdawg. You presented yourself as this sophisticated, higher end, winning player, man about town "Pope of Las Vegas", and I have proven, or maybe more accurately your responses, have proven and exposed you as just another Rob Singer type garden variety troll, getting so manically angry and bitter when people, real players (not just myself), see holes and don't believe your silly fairytale, for whatever reason you have posted it.

No real player, would be as upset as you are that people express doubt about their stories and claims, as to troll, LIES about and even dox the person. You are a nut who exposed himself.

[Rob.Singer]

In the end, I shared a play that we "stumbled on" and executed, even traveling several months to do so. And the trolls and KJ haters trolled and hated, as they always do, despite that several of the real players/Ap's acknowledging that these plays and types of "glitches" are out there at times.

So what else is new! That is what this forum is now.

You're a lying hypocrite.

You CONSTANTLY criticized me for not having pictures, tax returns, or some verifiable proof TEN YEARS AFTER THE PLAY ENDED that I played and profited from the DU glitch. Now here you are, a known & proven pathological liar, coming up with a tale sbout a play THAT JUST ENDED. Yet you cannot come up with one iota of evidence that you even left town--let alone played this concoction.

How about a picture or some sort of documentation kew....surely it would have crossed your mind to back this claim up given your pathetic reputation. Simply saying "other well known forum AP's have acknowledged that these glitches can occur" doesn't cut it kew. Everyone already knows that--especially ME.

[AxelWolf]

How are you going to get to a high enough count on an electronic machine such that you are in a position where you have to make these departures from basic strategy in the first place ? Does a glitched machine virtual dealer keep dealing without reshuffling until a certain point like a real dealer would ? The only way a player would have to consider these cases you put forth is if the virtual dealer does not reshuffle after each round. I totally get that in early versions of Dealer's Angels individuals and teams would wreck the casino since the cards were not shuffled after every round. But is this the case with double down glitched games ?

You are not understanding what I am saying. (and that is probably my fault). I am NOT saying we were counting this game. We were not. I am saying there are certain instances that can change whether a hand is +EV or profitable to double down. Counting is one such measure. With a higher count some hands are profitable double downs that otherwise wouldn't be. In this case, it was that ability to hit after doubling down and the chance to improve a hand where you otherwise wouldn't have that opportunity that could make a hand a profitable double down opportunity, when it otherwise wouldn't have been.

But it is all good. the play is over for me. We got what we got out of it.

Rob Singer: Just shut the fuck up for once. You have no idea what you are talking about with your comments on this situation, as you usually don't. Stay in your lane! And that lane is an old man, who's retirement plan is living off his daughter.

Axelwolf.: No I didn't give a lot of details, like how many hands, per hour, what the advantage was. I did give this privately to a couple people that I asked what it was worth. I will say that the game had a $100 bet maximum, and that seemed to be built or programmed in, as that was constant everywhere. And that was disappointing. That low bert max, and speed of the game, which were constants is what prevented this from being a really big play and payday.

Based on the numbers I was given of what it was worth per hours, we came in reasonably close, but a little bit under expectation. That may have been because the speed of the game was a little slower than I estimated. It may have been that despite my common sense strategy, we missed something, some particular hand that reduced EV, or it may have just been regular variance. But we were a little under. But in the end, still did well. The play was well worth it for us.

It really does seem like there are some favorable glitches out there with all these electronic and computerized games, seemingly especially blackjack. Like mickey said, I will probably keep an eye out and take a look at different games going forward.

I wouldn't believe it's more prevalent with Blackjack I would guess its less prevalent. However, since blackjack is a higher return than most games with lots of decision making it stands to reason that any mistakes would be more likely to be player profitable.

Whatever the case at $200 per hour based on estimated hands per hour and a $100 bet your edge wasn't very good between .3 and .75

[jdog]

I shared a play that we "stumbled on" and executed, even traveling several months to do so.

Several months?? Only two months ago you were inquiring with this forum to help figure out what the play is worth. Just over 5 weeks before you started this thread you were talking about being home doing a lot of sports betting and at the beginning of this thread you stated it was just 9 weeks of traveling.

C'mon you're better than this man... keep your BS straight!

[Rob.Singer]

Face it kew, you got your tit caught in the wringer yet again. The more you say the worse it gets.

These fables of yours only make you look foolish--which I love by the way. You've never seemed to learn how to properly prepare your lies--only how to double down on them once you're caught red-handed. And isn't it sweet of you saying I don't know what I'm talking about. That's what any fraud would say to the person who wasn't fooled by any of your fabrications from the moment I read your first post.

Fess up to being the biggest liar on the internet!

[kewlJ]

I shared a play that we "stumbled on" and executed, even traveling several months to do so.

Several months?? Only two months ago you were inquiring with this forum to help figure out what the play is worth. Just over 5 weeks before you started this thread you were talking about being home doing a lot of sports betting and at the beginning of this thread you stated it was just 9 weeks of traveling.

C'mon you're better than this man... keep your BS straight!

WTF!? You are now like coach belly trying to find your "gottch ya" moments.

If you must know my brother mentioned this play inid March. I checked it out the next day and Pmed a couple people and posted publicly asking what it was worth. I had an idea, but wanted conformation.

We began playing this machine locally on March 18 and that lasted 8 days. The following day we started a driving trip around 4 neighboring states and returned home. Then we flew to the gulf coast area for a couple weeks and flew back home for a weekend. And yes I do my sports betting volume bonus play when ever I could. Then we flew to the middle of the country and when we started to hit problems, the directly to the east coast.

Why do you think it is any of your business where I was and when Fuck you Jdog. You have become as big a troll as Singer and Mdawg.

[Rob.Singer]

How are you going to get to a high enough count on an electronic machine such that you are in a position where you have to make these departures from basic strategy in the first place ? Does a glitched machine virtual dealer keep dealing without reshuffling until a certain point like a real dealer would ? The only way a player would have to consider these cases you put forth is if the virtual dealer does not reshuffle after each round. I totally get that in early versions of Dealer's Angels individuals and teams would wreck the casino since the cards were not shuffled after every round. But is this the case with double down glitched games ?

You are not understanding what I am saying. (and that is probably my fault). I am NOT saying we were counting this game. We were not. I am saying there are certain instances that can change whether a hand is +EV or profitable to double down. Counting is one such measure. With a higher count some hands are profitable double downs that otherwise wouldn't be. In this case, it was that ability to hit after doubling down and the chance to improve a hand where you otherwise wouldn't have that opportunity that could make a hand a profitable double down opportunity, when it otherwise wouldn't have been.

But it is all good. the play is over for me. We got what we got out of it.

Rob Singer: Just shut the fuck up for once. You have no idea what you are talking about with your comments on this situation, as you usually don't. Stay in your lane! And that lane is an old man, who's retirement plan is living off his daughter.

Axelwolf.: No I didn't give a lot of details, like how many hands, per hour, what the advantage was. I did give this privately to a couple people that I asked what it was worth. I will say that the game had a $100 bet maximum, and that seemed to be built or programmed in, as that was constant everywhere. And that was disappointing. That low bert max, and speed of the game, which were constants is what prevented this from being a really big play and payday.

Based on the numbers I was given of what it was worth per hours, we came in reasonably close, but a little bit under expectation. That may have been because the speed of the game was a little slower than I estimated. It may have been that despite my common sense strategy, we missed something, some particular hand that reduced EV, or it may have just been regular variance. But we were a little under. But in the end, still did well. The play was well worth it for us.

It really does seem like there are some favorable glitches out there with all these electronic and computerized games, seemingly especially blackjack. Like mickey said, I will probably keep an eye out and take a look at different games going forward.

I wouldn't believe it's more prevalent with Blackjack I would guess its less prevalent. However, since blackjack is a higher return than most games with lots of decision making it stands to reason that any mistakes would be more likely to be player profitable.

Whatever the case at $200 per hour based on estimated hands per hour and a $100 bet your edge wasn't very good between .3 and .75

Keep asking him for more details. It's fun watching him adjust his tale on the go.

The best time to be awake is 1-6am.

[Rob.Singer]

I shared a play that we "stumbled on" and executed, even traveling several months to do so.

Several months?? Only two months ago you were inquiring with this forum to help figure out what the play is worth. Just over 5 weeks before you started this thread you were talking about being home doing a lot of sports betting and at the beginning of this thread you stated it was just 9 weeks of traveling.

C'mon you're better than this man... keep your BS straight!

WTF!? You are now like coach belly trying to find your "gottch ya" moments.

If you must know my brother mentioned this play inid March. I checked it out the next day and Pmed a couple people and posted publicly asking what it was worth. I had an idea, but wanted conformation.

We began playing this machine locally on March 18 and that lasted 8 days. The following day we started a driving trip around 4 neighboring states and returned home. Then we flew to the gulf coast area for a couple weeks and flew back home for a weekend. And yes I do my sports betting volume bonus play when ever I could. Then we flew to the middle of the country and when we started to hit problems, the directly to the east coast.

Why do you think it is any of your business where I was and when Fuck you Jdog. You have become as big a troll as Singer and Mdawg.

Like I said----it's a belly of laughs watching this phony storyteller make tweaks & adjustments to the details as soon as others spot inconsistencies and, um, more of his lies.

And if you want the pleasure of robbing him of some more sleep, ask for evidence that he ever left town....and a pic of the elusive baby bro

[kewlJ]

Like I said----it's a belly of laughs watching this phony storyteller make tweaks & adjustments to the details as soon as others spot inconsistencies and, um, more of his lies.

And if you want the pleasure of robbing him of some more sleep, ask for evidence that he ever left town....and a pic of the elusive baby bro

You almost got to love this idiot, demanding that anyone post pictures of family members, and proof of this or proof of that! You know.... the jackass that pulled the Newell RV stunt.

Rob thinks he bothers me. Rob is completely irrelevant. Like a gnat buzzing around. Rob is like that Jerry Stiller character living in his daughters basement in that King of Queens show. Except desert areas like Pheonix have no basements, so Rob and the wife are in whatever room the daughter puts them in.

I share some of my experiences and certain things that I do because I want to share certain things. I don't give a damn about what some old broken down degenerate gambler thinks or says.

Now that said, I do sort of enjoy how flat out angry and bothered both Rob and this Mdawg character, two losing gamblers, (mdawg possibly at higher stakes) get, knowing that I win long-term (even modest amounts), when they lose. That is priceless, as the commercial goes.

[kewlJ]

MrV has hit the nail on the head with these two clowns.

Rob claims to have won 3 million dollars on the double up bug. He didbt, but that is his claim. He claims to have won hundreds of thousands of dollars playing a progression system before that. And he claims to have won not 1 but several million dollar jackpots since. And yet he is bothered to the point of constant trolling by two APs that discovered a mathematically +Ev play and played it for a couple months, netting 40k or so each.

Now Mdawg.... What was the total mission146 came up with of his claimed winning over the past few years? 4-5 million, I think. And yet he spends all his time trolling a low to mid level card counter.

As MrV has said a number of times....what is wrong with this picture?

[MDawg]

Fuck you Jdog.

(Etc. etc.)

I think kewlJ doesn't understand why so many people here dislike him.

It's not just that he lies. We've had lots of liars on this forum.

It's the seriousness with which kewlJ tells these lies, and then lashes out at those who doubt them. There's a certain arrogance to those posts, in the tone, "Of course this is fucking true, and you're a complete idiot for even doubting this.

Then, when the forum userbase turns out to be smarter than he expected and disproves some of them, we get the mea culpa that he wasn't telling the truth all along. Fessing up only gets you credit if you do it before people take apart the lie and prove otherwise. You get even less credit if you were arrogant/combative/condescending during the questioning of the story's veracity.

'Nuff said. From the Druff man hisself!

[Rob.Singer]

MrV has hit the nail on the head with these two clowns.

Rob claims to have won 3 million dollars on the double up bug. He didbt, but that is his claim. He claims to have won hundreds of thousands of dollars playing a progression system before that. And he claims to have won not 1 but several million dollar jackpots since. And yet he is bothered to the point of constant trolling by two APs that discovered a mathematically +Ev play and played it for a couple months, netting 40k or so each.

Now Mdawg.... What was the total mission146 came up with of his claimed winning over the past few years? 4-5 million, I think. And yet he spends all his time trolling a low to mid level card counter.

As MrV has said a number of times....what is wrong with this picture?

Translation: kew regrets hisself for fabricating yet another storyline, because he got nailed again!

(Pssst....and here's a free hint kew: if you ain't bothered, you ain't posting essays about how you ain't bothered)

[tableplay]

You are not understanding what I am saying. (and that is probably my fault). I am NOT saying we were counting this game. We were not. I am saying there are certain instances that can change whether a hand is +EV or profitable to double down. Counting is one such measure. With a higher count some hands are profitable double downs that otherwise wouldn't be. In this case, it was that ability to hit after doubling down and the chance to improve a hand where you otherwise wouldn't have that opportunity that could make a hand a profitable double down opportunity, when it otherwise wouldn't have been.

But it is all good. the play is over for me. We got what we got out of it.

All that would have been required when running that play on the glitched machine would have been to use Shackleford's strategy chart for Super 21 holding three cards since this strategy already takes into account future possibilities of choices to stand hit or double down (you can use Smurgerburger's simulation suggestion to confirm this obviously) for a given dealer upcard - that is, Shackleford arrived at this chart via simulation in the first place. Unfortunately, you had never heard of this rule in blackjack based on your earlier statement. I wonder what percentage of professional blackjack players have never heard of Super Fun 21.

the "hit, stand, double down" options, lit up again, for a quick second, or more like partial second

It's very odd, that the possibility of doubling your bet a 2nd time is never mentioned, when you state earlier that this is one of the choices that comes up for a half a second on the glitch options. Example: you are dealt an A,3 with the dealer showing a 5. You double down in this spot as everyone reading this thread knows. Now you get a 2. So that you have A,3,2 in your hand when the glitch choice comes up for half a second. Well obviously you choose the double down option again (in this case, you may only get to double your initial bet for the 2nd time or you may get to double the sum of your initial bet and the first double bet) . But your initial breakdown of this play only mentions the possibility of hitting. Never is doubling a 2nd time mentioned.

[AxelWolf]

So is it just something I missed? I still haven't seen anyone come up with a % value on this.

According to KJ betting $100 a hand made you $200 an hour. I haven't seen any recent Blackjack machines that couldn't crank out at least 300 HPH.

[MDawg]

You almost got to love this idiot, demanding that anyone post pictures, and proof of this or proof of that!

In the past UNKewlJ has pushed RobSinger to provide proof to the Dandruff man,
https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...l=1#post105150

Now in answer to DanDruff's request for that same info, Rob is just going with a "No, I don't want to do that".

It just is not credible that Rob just had to tell someone, so badly, but yet refuses to provide any supporting documentation that would support his extraordinary claim.

and stated that failure to do so, failure to be willing to provide proof to someone like Dan Druff AFTER talking about whatever online, represents lack of credibility.

And as V pointed out,

KJ, enough.

It is YOU who is putting yourself out there and making the claim

so, just like what UNKewlJ said about RobSinger, that because he "had to tell someone," he should be willing to back up what he said, so should the UNKewl one follow his own demand and prove up what he has said.

Before that occasion when he kept pushing RobSinger to provide proof to DanDruff (and made a big deal out of that he didn't meet up with him / didn't provide any proof), UNKewlJ kept pushing for MDawg to play at a table in front of DanDruff or to at least meet him in Vegas, including for example here,

So MDawg posts this fantasy stuff on numerous forum and now both Wizard and Dan Druff have requested to meet him and observe his play. He refused wizard and will refuse Druff as well.

But it is very appropriate for these forum owners who provide the platform for this "adventure" to say "ENOUGH...show me".

to prove that he's for real, which was before I'd played in front of Wizard in the DarkOz Challenge.
UNKewlJ also loves to quote the DanDruff man with conviction, stating that Druff speaks with authority,

Dan Druff simply shares his expert opinion of what the truth is. he has been on these forums for a very long time and knows how to read people.

Basically, this hypocrite whatever he accuses others of, you may be assured that he's done himself first, and worse. In the end, he can't come up with any reason for his not wanting to prove up his backrooming lawsuit story, other than that no proof exists. We are, after all, talking about a guy who, as AccountInQuestion has put it, is in a Neverending quest for street creds on the internet.
, so it makes no sense that someone so desperate to be believed would not put up, since obviously he's not ever going to shut up. If he wanted no one to know, he would not have put the story out there in the first place.

Part of his mental illness is that he spend days writing about how so and so has been doing this while he has not (in this case the nonsense about claiming that he's never asked anyone to provide proof) when all the while, that's exactly what he has done in the past, demand proof of others.

“When I do it, it’s okay. When anyone else does it, it is not!” -UNKewlJ ’24

Basically, this hypocrite whatever he accuses others of, you may be assured that he's done himself first, and worse.

[Rob.Singer]

In the past UNKewlJ has pushed RobSinger to provide proof to the Dandruff man,
https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...l=1#post105150

Now in answer to DanDruff's request for that same info, Rob is just going with a "No, I don't want to do that".

It just is not credible that Rob just had to tell someone, so badly, but yet refuses to provide any supporting documentation that would support his extraordinary claim.

and stated that failure to do so, failure to be willing to provide proof to someone like Dan Druff AFTER talking about whatever online, represents lack of credibility.

And as V pointed out,

KJ, enough.

It is YOU who is putting yourself out there and making the claim

so, just like what UNKewlJ said about RobSinger, that because he "had to tell someone," he should be willing to back up what he said, so should the UNKewl one follow his own demand and prove up what he has said.

Before that occasion when he kept pushing RobSinger to provide proof to DanDruff (and made a big deal out of that he didn't meet up with him / didn't provide any proof), UNKewlJ kept pushing for MDawg to play at a table in front of DanDruff or to at least meet him in Vegas, including for example here,

So MDawg posts this fantasy stuff on numerous forum and now both Wizard and Dan Druff have requested to meet him and observe his play. He refused wizard and will refuse Druff as well.

But it is very appropriate for these forum owners who provide the platform for this "adventure" to say "ENOUGH...show me".

to prove that he's for real, which was before I'd played in front of Wizard in the DarkOz Challenge.
UNKewlJ also loves to quote the DanDruff man with conviction, stating that Druff speaks with authority,

Dan Druff simply shares his expert opinion of what the truth is. he has been on these forums for a very long time and knows how to read people.

Basically, this hypocrite whatever he accuses others of, you may be assured that he's done himself first, and worse. In the end, he can't come up with any reason for his not wanting to prove up his backrooming lawsuit story, other than that no proof exists. We are, after all, talking about a guy who, as AccountInQuestion has put it, is in a Neverending quest for street creds on the internet.
, so it makes no sense that someone so desperate to be believed would not put up, since obviously he's not ever going to shut up. If he wanted no one to know, he would not have put the story out there in the first place.

Part of his mental illness is that he spend days writing about how so and so has been doing this while he has not (in this case the nonsense about claiming that he's never asked anyone to provide proof) when all the while, that's exactly what he has done in the past, demand proof of others.

“When I do it, it’s okay. When anyone else does it, it is not!” -UNKewlJ ’24

Basically, this hypocrite whatever he accuses others of, you may be assured that he's done himself first, and worse.

There's no doubt kew gets what he's being mocked about here. Not only is he the forum's biggest liar and fake storyteller--he's also the world's most prolific hypocrite! And watching the fairy go down in flames is like having Megan Fox pour warm honey over my balls....from 9-1/2 inches away.

[kewlJ]

It's very odd, that the possibility of doubling your bet a 2nd time is never mentioned, when you state earlier that this is one of the choices that comes up for a half a second on the glitch options.

I thought I was clear on this. After the initial double down was complete, the 'hit', 'double down' and 'stand' options all lit up again for a second time, but only for a fraction of a second. You had to act very quickly. This is why without the ability to run simulations, the common sense strategy I came up with was to re-double down more aggressively than you otherwise would have, doubling down more 8's and 9's, knowing you could re-double if you drew the dreaded 2 or 3 as your double card, and re-hit if you drew something like a 4 or 6 (dependent on what the dealers up card was). I never tried to re-double anything higher than an 11 as that didn't make sense to me, but my guess would be you would not be able to since the original double down was limited to 8-11 totals, I assume the re-doubledown would also be limited to hands totaling 8-11.

But again, the key was you had to act very, very quickly.

Whatever the case at $200 per hour based on estimated hands per hour and a $100 bet your edge wasn't very good between .3 and .75

So is it just something I missed? I still haven't seen anyone come up with a % value on this.

According to KJ betting $100 a hand made you $200 an hour. I haven't seen any recent Blackjack machines that couldn't crank out at least 300 HPH.

I don't know where you are coming up with these numbers? They are quite different than the 2 estimates I received in the $200 range.

Hands per hour: When I asked a couple players privately, I estimated 120 rounds per hour. 2 rounds per minute. And the estimates were for close to a 2% advantage. Now after having played the game for 2 months, I now think that 120 rounds per hour was high. I would now put it at 90-100 rounds per hour. This may be at least in part why our final numbers were a little below the original estimates.

Your friend Mike, didn't supply me with the information I requested. he would only do so, if I told him the game and location in Las Vegas. I couldn't do that. For one thing, it wasn't my play to be giving away. My brother found it and brought me in on it. But I highly doubt, Shackleford would have been interested in a play with $100 max bet, 100 rounds per hour, @ between .3% and .75%edge. That would be $30-$75 and hour. So for me, when he was interested in the play and would only provide me the information if I gave him the play, it kind of confirmed the other numbers in the $200/hr range were more what it was.


While I find this discussion interesting from the math angle, I am disappointed that the discussion is occuring NOW. I needed and requested this information and could have used this dissussion back in mid March.

[Rob.Singer]

I thought I was clear on this. After the initial double down was complete, the 'hit', 'double down' and 'stand' options all lit up again for a second time, but only for a fraction of a second. You had to act very quickly. This is why without the ability to run simulations, the common sense strategy I came up with was to re-double down more aggressively than you otherwise would have, doubling down more 8's and 9's, knowing you could re-double if you drew the dreaded 2 or 3 as your double card, and re-hit if you drew something like a 4 or 6 (dependent on what the dealers up card was). I never tried to re-double anything higher than an 11 as that didn't make sense to me, but my guess would be you would not be able to since the original double down was limited to 8-11 totals, I assume the re-doubledown would also be limited to hands totaling 8-11.

But again, the key was you had to act very, very quickly.

So is it just something I missed? I still haven't seen anyone come up with a % value on this.

According to KJ betting $100 a hand made you $200 an hour. I haven't seen any recent Blackjack machines that couldn't crank out at least 300 HPH.

I don't know where you are coming up with these numbers? They are quite different than the 2 estimates I received in the $200 range.

Hands per hour: When I asked a couple players privately, I estimated 120 rounds per hour. 2 rounds per minute. And the estimates were for close to a 2% advantage. Now after having played the game for 2 months, I now think that 120 rounds per hour was high. I would now put it at 90-100 rounds per hour. This may be at least in part why our final numbers were a little below the original estimates.

Your friend Mike, didn't supply me with the information I requested. he would only do so, if I told him the game and location in Las Vegas. I couldn't do that. For one thing, it wasn't my play to be giving away. My brother found it and brought me in on it. But I highly doubt, Shackleford would have been interested in a play with $100 max bet, 100 rounds per hour, @ between .3% and .75%edge. That would be $30-$75 and hour. So for me, when he was interested in the play and would only provide me the information if I gave him the play, it kind of confirmed the other numbers in the $200/hr range were more what it was.


While I find this discussion interesting from the math angle, I am disappointed that the discussion is occuring NOW. I needed and requested this information and could have used this dissussion back in mid March.

Quick kew---adapt, adjust, and deflect! Fill those holes fast