Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
If everyone remembers, when the tough questions kept coming about the two-table fiasco, these ap's finally relented into "well, the count doesn't need to be THAT accurate!" which to any intelligent mind immediately contradicted their claims about how counting provides such a slight edge that requires a "long grind". Now, suddenly, the second table count is allowed to be so-so for the advantage.
I hope everyone remembers it because gaining an advantage from a partial count is a mathematically proven principal. EVERY count in regards to card counting is a partial count...unless the game is dealt to the very last card. Those cards behind the shuffle point are unseen cards. All that happens if you miss seeing a couple cards is that number of unseen cards grows a bit. This is not desirable, but it doesn't change the principal of card counting, where an advantage is gained by the cards that are seen. This is a proven mathematical fact.

I am not surprised you have trouble understanding such a proven mathematical fact. I mean we are talking about a guy who goes against the proven principals of mathematics, in favor of voodoo fantasies, like that he won a million dollars grinding away at a -EV game using completely voodoo principals (against proven math) of progressive betting and stop limits.

The fact is I have proven mathematical principals and facts on my side, you have voodoo concepts and fantasies on your side and all the vitriol and hate that you spew in an attempt to deflect from that truth can't change that.