Las Vegas GF Chat Room

I cannot legally post them fucktard! Seriously, what the fuck is the matter with you?

 

PotheadV is lost in his empty spaced drug addled mind. We're talking about a guy who has no idea what it takes to play at my level, let alone get a credit line to be able to play at a private table. Thinks a mill net worth carries the day.

And then we have the UNKewl one, spouting off nonsense he read about in books, not actually playing. Intermixing that with further nonsense about casino executives hand delivering reams of documents to his rathole apartment on Halloween.

Anyway I have real work to attend to before I go back and play some actual chips at actual tables. Have fun, UNKewl and PotHeadV ones!

 

You are required to prove your above statement.

Post any agreements that prevent you from legally posting documents,
that you've claimed to have seen, with info about other members.

 

Look at the end of the day, Rob is basically accusing me of plagiarism, saying the discussion about tracking two tables came from books and forums years ago, when it did not! So let's see him prove this accusation. He can't and won't because such discussion has never to my knowledge appeared in print.

Now there is really nothing wrong with learning from players that came before you and their experiences, whether through books or forums. 90% of what I know, do and have learned has been learned that way. But in this particular case, there just is no such discussion anywhere (that I know of) and again, I challenge Rob to prove me wrong and prove his accusation, rather than run and hide as he always does.

 

I am NOT required to do any such thing! I can not post the information you request without placing myself in legal jeopardy and or others in legal jeopardy or danger.

I am not going to play your fucking games you troll.

 

Then others, not limited to Singer, are not, and should not be, required to do what you request of them.

You have repeatedly made unsubstantiated claims, assertions and accusations about other members,
but you've never provided any proof that what you've written is legitimate or truthful.

Until you provide proof of your claims, you have no standing to demand that of others.

 

This post completely exemplifies what this Mdog is about. It is all a big pissing contest of a very insecure person. "my level", "private table" "credit limits" and a million net worth is nothing....mine is bigger. Referring to my condo as a rathole is also part of that, need to put others down, mine is better, pissing contest insecurities of this person.

He was born into money. Good for him. But that doesn't make him better than anyone else. I see no evidence that he has done much on his own, least of all his gambling claims.

I am not competing with anyone, other AP's, least of all some wealthy brat born into money and his fictious narcistic claims. I am a real player, an advantage player, carving out a comfortable living with my real casino play. I make probably lower 10% of most full-time type AP's so I am not out to impress anyone. Just a real player that shares some of my real experiences.

Now I don't know what this dude is about, other than the insecure, narcistic needs I have already addressed, but almost everything this person claims defies the math and the way Las Vegas operates. In other words it is fantasy. It is fiction. Make believe. And that is exactly why he made Shackleford sign a NDA to not share his expert opinion about what he witnessed. If this dude has nothing to hide.....why is he hiding?

 

For the last time: Singer's accusation doesn't involve anyone else, nor proving it put anyone else in any danger. He has basically accused me of plagiarism, and I challenge him to prove it by posting a source that had this discussion before I brought it up at VCT.

Now don't get me wrong. There are players that have used this technique before me. I didn't know it at the time. I thought I had come up with it. But others similarly came up with it because it is a natural progression, once you start to exit negative counts or rounds. You immediately start looking for that next opportunity, even before you have exited the first.

If Singer can prove that this information was in books or booklets years before I brought it up, why wouldn't he? Wouldn't that make me look bad? But he can't because once again he is full of shit, making shit up.

 

Singer always makes you look bad.

Tracking a second table is essentially back-counting the second table,
and it was written about in books long before you joined VCT, and claimed that you could do it.

Wong's mechanics for back-counting did not preclude any other activities, including playing at another table,
so long as the dealt cards could be observed.

But the fact that it's possible to play at one table and track another doesn't prove that you can do it.

You claimed that you could, can and do track a second table while playing another.
You were challenged to prove your claim, and you were unwilling to prove it.

Your entire body of claims, assertions and accusations have involved others, not just Singer.

Now you insist that another member prove his claim in this instance,
while you refuse to ever prove any of your claims, in all instances.

So why shouldn't Singer ignore your request? We all know that he's right.

 

Wrong! as usual.

Back counting, and you will note the word back, because it is standing in back of or behind a table and counting and then jumping in when the count is good. That is different than playing one table and tracking a second for a better opportunity.

The advantages of playing one table and tracking a second looking for a better opportunity are 1), no down time. Whereas back counting is ALL down time. The second advantage is tracking a second table allows the player to see and play more +count rounds within the same time period and number of rounds seen.

For example, if you play a single table for an hour and see and play 100 rounds, we know that a certain set # of rounds will be played at say TC +3, which is about when I max bet. For a 6 deck game, dealt to fairly standard 75% penetration that number is about 5.8%. I will see a count of +3 or more 5.8% of the time or 5.8 out of a 100.

Now if I am tracking a second table and exit my first game on a neutral or negative count to pursue the second game with a more favorable count, the number of +3 TC's I will see and play goes up to as much as double, for 100 rounds seen and play. Not actually double because there are times both tables have a +3 TC and you can't play both, but the number increases dramatically. You are essentially changing the true count frequencies in the players favor by dropping some of the negative counts at one table and replacing them with more positive counts at the second.

This technique can increase the win rate, again, not quite double, but substantially. This does not occur with standard back counting, proving you assumption wrong.

Now I am done with you. You are trolling, as you always are, so just fuck off.

 

Technically, the numbers I just posted are slightly off. 5.8 is the number of TC +3 a player will see who is playing a play all approach, meaning sitting and playing every count. I do NOT sit and play every count. I exit at negative counts of -2 or less, even if there is no tracking of a second table and better opportunity, so I play about 85% of all counts. This means I see a max bet opportunity 5.8 times out of 85 rounds seen and played. That extrapolates to 6.8% of the time. And if I can track a second table allowing to jump to a more favorable count that number will be almost double. Again, this is about changing the true count frequencies in the players favor and it has a huge impact on win rate.

 

Oh...you have to be in back or behind a table, not off to the side, or else it's not back-counting?

You can't jump onto a table when the count is good, from another table, or else it's not back-counting,
because you've been playing another game, and counting off to the side and not behind the second table?

LOL. Is that how it works?

 

You're correct that I really don't know the exact amount you are betting these days, but that is because I have you on ignore at WoV and do not read your ridiculous short stories.

If as I assume you bet twenty K a hand in baccarat I could certainly play a shoe at that level if I chose to.

But I choose not to.

I wasn't born with a silver spoon up my ass like you appear to have been born (how else could a fucktard such as yourself get the money to bet like a drunken sailor on liberty in Macao?). I earned my money and as such I value it and won't piss it away like you seem to be doing.

Oh, and if you expect me to kow-tow to you (or to anybody) just because you / they may have more money than me, you'll be disappointed.

I look at the man, not his man-purse.

Sorry, you simply don't pass muster.

 

Although somewhat related, it is really an entirely different technique. Tracking a second table to jump to a more favorable count is about increasing the maxbet opportunities or really good counts per set of rounds seen and played.

Back-counting is about ONLY playing really good positive counts or max bet opportunities, which is mathematically better, BUT really unable to apply this technique for long without drawing major attention. The dealer, pit, surveillance and even other players will notice a player standing behind the table for more than a round or two. It makes everybody, including other players uncomfortable. It just stands out.

And in Vegas during busy times and the east coast and other crowded places just about all the time, back counting isn't even viable, because of crowded conditions.

Again, tracking a second table is about increasing the max bet or really good counts you see over a set number of rounds. That is completely different than playing only plus counts which is what back counting is.

 

I also want to say this and then I am off to lunch with Mom. This Mdog character frequently states that I don't talk about specific hands played or sessions played. Damn Right! I used to share that kind of stuff, it got me nothing but grief from people trying to harm me.

I mean what blackjack hand is worth talking about? What hand haven't I see 50,000 times or more?

Double down 10, vs dealer 7 draw 2 and lose. Seen it a million times.

Double down 10 vs dealer 7, draw 2 and still win when the dealer turns over a 8 and 9 or something to that effect. Been there done that seen it a million times.

3 blackjacks in a row.....many, many, times. 4 blackjack in a row? me a few times dealer even a few more. 5 blackjack in a row. Haven't seen that yet. I would like to on my side of table.

About the only think unusual worth talking about is a hand that is split and doubled a number of times. 2 weeks ago, I had a hand split 4 times, with 3 of those turning into doubles with my maxbet out. That is 7 max bets on the felt and THAT is the kind of hand that can make or break a whole night. In this case it didn't as I won 2 of the betting interest, lost 3 and pushed 2. So while something like that is unusual enough to mention, why should I bother. I just get trolled.

 

Entirely? You're joining a table when the count gets favorable.

It doesn't matter whether or where you are standing or sitting while you count the table,
unless you want to disguise the fact that you are counting one table by standing at another table,
but you are still back counting the second table.

You are stubbornly arguing this distinction without a difference to deflect from the truth,
and the question at hand...namely why should any member entertain your request to prove
their claims about you, when you refuse to prove your claims about them?

Nothing prevents you from providing evidence of the documents you claim to have seen,
other than your own free will...in other words, your choice is not to prove what you have claimed.

Singer, and any other member, can avail themselves of the same choice.

 

Quoting Crimm, good one UNKOOL1. Neither one of you guys can read the forum playing field. Crimm should stick to what he does best, slots and politics LOL. You're very ignorant Mr Primadonna !

 

Thank you for the information. I don't know how I missed this post of yours until now, but thanks for taking the time to explain.

When the Asian man was playing the Ocean Magic Grand, he was getting lots of bubbles but mostly to the right.

Since I'm here at Borgata for another week at least, I will give them a try.

 

Well, I gave it a try on the Ocean Magic Grand machine but as soon as I realized that 100 level is actually $10 per spin and not $1, I quit since I was down $100 just like that and I wasn't ready for losing so fast without knowing if I would recover the loss.

I did see bubbles at the 100 level before I started it but they were at the top and most likely going away, so I can only guess that AP was over already on that machine as I didn't get any of the bubble clusters like the other guy was getting.

I didn't check the Cashman Bingo machines; instead I went over to the table game I normally play since it was empty and won $120 so I quit.

While playing my game, it must been the time to get the free bet coupons since three of the players who were playing baccarat on a table to the left of me all got up and went to the kiosks and brought back the following coupons. 4 x $250, 4 x $500, and 5 x $100 respectively from left to right. I know the player to the left and he got $1K worth of free bets. The man in the middle had $25K in chips and he got 2K in free bets. I got only $50 worth of coupons so I am not a big gambler.

I would think that you can print the coupons in various denominations and the middle guy chose $500. He was already betting $500 minimum up to 2K so it must his thing to bet that much all the time which I never could.

 

LG: Just curious, but why, exactly, are you choosing to live in a casino instead of your home which is 1 1/2 hours away?

Gotta be more than just covid concerns.

Heck, you still have to pay mortgage and utilities, and what about your job?

As a programmer I suppose you could do that remotely, but I'm not sure.

Sure, you might enjoy gambling but living in a casino for years seems "a bit" excessive, don't you think?