Misc The VCT Thread!

Just a note to various and sundry alleged "APs." You know who you are.

The questions arise regarding:

"APs" who deposit money at sports books to take advantage of bonuses, then immediately climb to 25 games over .500. This would provide a profit far beyond the bonus. Rather than working off the bonus by middles shooting at various sites, the "APs" keep firing and soon dip to .500 with their wagers, but announce they are content and pleased to have done so, as they are now a third or halfway to "working off the bonus."

Who in their right mind would do such a thing?

If any of you have rational minds and a smidgeon of sports betting experience, multiple red flags fly upon the reading of stories like this.

Bonuses, in general, do not have much in the way of deadlines for being "worked off." There's usually no hurry. So why would anyone 25 games over .500 keep firing? LOL. Well, let's look at the obvious culprit possibilities.

The "APs" may have recruited other folks' money and there is a deadline to the holding of that money. That's one possibility. So everything must be rolled over and processed ASAP. Or, conversely, the "APs" must be pretty damned broke to need their money back quickly. That's another very obvious rationale for working through bonuses after crashing from 25 games over .500 to simply .500.

Why not, when 25 games over .500, just fire at middles opportunities when they present themselves? Could it be that "some "APs" have no sense or ability or work ethic to monitor lines until middle shots become available? Too much work? Too complicated? Requires too much cash to outlay money at multiple books?

Common sense fires off the red alarms at stories such as these. They make no real sense. Obviously the person allegedly 25 games over .500 must have gotten full of themselves and their "angles" and decided to fire away because why? Greed? Naivete?

Being 25 games over .500 has to provide more profit than a bonus. Then you just middle shoot at multiple locations and work off the bonus(es)

Stories like these belong somewhere, but a thread titled "Professional Sports Betting" isn't it.

 

redietz, if you have something to say to or about me, then come to where I post and say it instead of being the pussy that you are and sniping from afar.

I am not a professional sports bettor, nor trying to be. I am an advantage player, mostly card counting, in this case taking advantage of the bonus opportunities offered to do some sports betting on the side as supplemental.

I don't know or care about middleing. And I am not trying to drag this play worth 18-20k out over years looking for only the best opportunities. I am volume betting to get through this cycle, get paid and start a second cycle. And I am playing with my own money, as I always do with everything I do. No backers. No partners. That is your kind of bullshit not mine.

So fuck off or be a man and discuss what you want to discuss where I am at.

 

MaxPen on UNKewLyingJ’s ways: You can't get to the truth with a fraud.

Keystone: KewlJ has proven he lies, is a drama queen, loves attention, and is generally an annoying gnat.



Seedvalue on UNKewlLyingJ: Nothing about your online persona is real. However over the years you have in an attempt to legitimize this persona revealed personal information about yourself. Clearly you have a mental disorder stemming from the traumatic day spent with neighbor Guy as a young boy.

 

You've gotta be kidding.

I'm going to throw your own personal presentation back at you. One of your main concerns, allegedly, is that people are bullshitting about blackjack and steering people astray. You feel as if such bullshitting should be corrected for the public good.

Here, in the post above, you say you are not a professional sports bettor. Over at VCT, in a thread named "Professional Sports Betting," you report going to 25 games over .500 using various and sundry angles and then, with a massive profit, you keep betting those angles to "work off the bonus." You crash and burn, reporting that you will be happy to be a bit below .500.

And the angles you report using, at least in the case of two of the three (Dan Druff's handful of games excluded) made minimal profit. Any use of those angles would have required thousand-to-one luck to arrive at 25 games over .500 the first two weeks.

Thus, you either were extremely fortunate or you were making it up to arrive at 25 games over .500 doing what you claim to have done for the weeks in question.

Now let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say you were indeed 25 games over .500 for the time in question doing what you claimed to have done. How brain dead would you have to be to keep using those angles as opposed to pocketing the profit of 25 games over .500 and then using middles shooting to work off the bonus? You did a dumb as a rock thing. Maybe you were so inebriated with your run of luck that you thought you'd break the bank, a la MDawg. Just the flat out wrong way to manage your finances. At least from a professional point of view.

So stuff you chastise MDawg for doing playing blackjack, you did betting sports. Plus you put it out there in a "professional sports betting" thread" that people will read and possibly emulate.

I find myself in the same position vis-a-vis your sports betting reporting that you have vis-a-vis MDawg's blackjack reporting. If anybody believes you, I need to (if I'm you) steer them away from doing what you're doing, because it's either bad reporting or incredible luck. And how you handled your position, if you were indeed 25 games over .500, while "working off the bonus," was dumb as a rock. The whole story belongs in an "Adventures of KewlJ" thread, not a "professional sports betting" thread.

Being me, it's not really my job to tell you what you're doing is wrong. But if I'm you, it's my job (I guess) to not let people emulate your narrative.

"Be a man." LOL. Grow up and understand that being naive, stupid, and undisciplined is no way to gamble. I thought professional blackjack players knew that.


P.S. And MDawg, if you're gonna use this quote, please give me additional credit for being crystal clear. From one writer to another and all that.

 

You are throwing down a lot of "after the fact" bullshit. Hindsight sure is 20/20, right?

You are also making shit up. KJ first reported going 25 games above .500. Then he reported falling to just 13 games above .500.

But here's the gambler's fallacy you fall for:

Going from zero to 25 games above .500 in short order certainly is extremely fortunate. Especially when the expectation to win each bet is 50% give or take a few points.

But what would KJ's expectation be on his next bet or series of bets? Why, by golly it would be somewhere around 50%, give or take a few points. The angles he used might have a little effect on that number but not much.

Conversely, falling back to .500 in a couple of weeks would certainly be extremely unfortunate...especially since the expectation on each bet is 50%, give or take a few points.

As you point out, winning 25 of 33 bets is certainly a thousands to 1 shot. But losing 8 of the next 33 games is also a thousands to 1 shot. The expectation in both cases is to bat about 50%. But you are attesting that that horrendous losing streak over the next 33 games is a forgone conclusion. And to top it off, you are leveling your criticism after the fact of KJ's numbers regressing to the mean.

Now let's say KJ hits his 50% expectation on his next 67 picks. That would put him at 66 and 34, or 16 games above .500.

What you fail to understand is whether one is 25 games above .500 or 25 games below .500 does not change the expectation on the future bets.

You also seem to think that people have the time to sit around on a computer 24/7 hoping to catch a line move. The hourly rate goes way way down.

Working those sports betting promotions comes down to "THE RECURRING SUM OF NET EDGE TIMES VOLUME EQUALS THE EARN." It works on it's own. You don't have to stick pins in it.

 

Where did this number of winning 25 out of 33 wagers come from? Is this something redietz made up?

I placed over 80 wagers in those first few weeks. I think at the point I was +25 it was 56 and 31. I have said many times now, I am volume wagering, sometimes 2 different 2 bets on the same game. I had over 100k rollover amount to play through @ $300 wagers.

+25 was just a good start. Nothing more. In the 3 weeks that followed I went down to +1 at one point and now am back at +7. Subtract the vig even at 5% (5% Fridays) and I am about even. And that is all I am hoping for. I will either hit my rollover amount the last weekend of this month or the first weekend of November depending on how selective I am with remaining games. Just want to be as close to 50% as possible (a little over even better). +25 after 2 weeks was just a decent start that's all. I have no idea why redietz is making that out to be so unusual. It seems like he is just totally unfamiliar with the volume betting that I am doing.

I will say this again because I don't think redietz gets it. The +EV is from the bonus money, what is left after the rollover, NOT from picking winners.

 

Yes, I will admit I have a reoccurring fantasy having a threesome with Kiwlj, and the pothead MrV. Just the thought of sticking my dick in Kewlj’s shit hole while sucking MrV’s cock keeps me walking around all day with an erection.

The only scenario that could top that is if you were to show up and suck the crushed corn, cum, and shit off my cock from Kewlj’s ass. Then afterwards the four of us could go to the local casino and pick off a few grand each.

Hey, everyone has dreams.

 

I was just using 25 of 33 as an example.

Your actual numbers, 56-31 are telling. You won 64% of your bets. Redietz painted your good fortune as being in the thousands to 1 of occurring. I don't think it would be thousands to 1 to do 64% in that size of a sample space.

But no matter what the stats are the expectation of winning your next bet or series of bets is around 50%, give or take a few points. That's where redietz goes wrong. You had a nice winning streak followed by a losing streak. Redietz, after the fact, chastised you for continuing to bet the same way after getting 25 games above .500, as if the losing streak was a forgone conclusion of happening. It wasn't. You still had around a 50% chance of winning every bet after that.

Redietz also has a problem with "money and time." Evidently, he has the idle time to wait around staring at a computer screen waiting for line changes so everyone else should have that time. What that does is stretch out the amount of days it would take you to clear the bonuses, and....also take away from your other gambling endeavors.

He doesn't get that running thru the rollover requirements as fast as is feasible means making the money much faster than waiting on middles.

 

Like I said, you're a faggot.

 

duplicate

 

You left out the best part of my post. Don't worry, I'll post it here again.

The only scenario that could top that is if you {Micky} were to show up and suck the crushed corn, cum, and shit off my cock from Kewlj’s ass. Then afterwards the four of us could go to the local casino and pick off a few grand each.

 

If I had to guess, it looks like Kewlj suddenly is not talking much about his professional BJ talents. He seems to be leaning towards other avenues of gambling income, trying to come across like Axelass.

Kewlj, no one is going to take you serious anymore. You are a confirmed proven compulsive liar. Do yourself a favor and try getting a real job. Ever think about becoming a dealer for a casino? No matter what job you get or where, if they ever try to fire you, you could always play the gay shit. You know that alphabet list of gay shit taken place all over the country.

 

What's missing from some "AP" calculations is any sense of historical fact. Go check all the thousands of entrants in The SuperBook Contest or The Circa Contest or The Golden Nugget Contest or any pointspread contest and see how many people in the sample population actually get to 25 games over .500. Then see how many end at 25 games over .500. Both populations are quite small, the second of course being smaller.

Getting to 25 games over .500 at any point in a football season is a rare accomplishment. Very rare. Finishing 25 games over .500 is rarer still.

If you have no historical context, if you are naive or dumb enough to think, gee, I'm 25 games over .500 doing A and B, let's keep doing A and B, you have no understanding of anything in sports betting. You think these are coin flips.

It is truly comical that these alleged name "APs" think that statistical rules applicable to random events can be transposed over to non-random events. And that you should bet money on them. It's an error of a fundamental nature, something that would be shot down in a Stat 101 class immediately.

How can you mistake non-random events for random events?

I'm not sure how, but I'm pretty sure why. The "APs" find it useful to sell the story that non-random events follow the same statistical rules as random events. It gives them an excuse to promote their "expertise" when their "expertise" doesn't apply. And it gives them an excuse to dip their toes in things they don't understand in any fundamental way.

 

redeitz, you are comparing apples to oranges. You are comparing sports betters like yourself and most others that make 1 or 2 or even a handful of picks each week to the volume betting that I am doing where I make 40-50 bets each week. AND you seem mezmerized by that number of +25 (fater 2 weeks.

56-31 after 2 weeks. That is a win % of 64.3 (as mickey said). So what if a player was only making a handful of picks which you seem much more familiar with and posted that he was 5-3 after 2 weeks. That is a win % of 62.5 (almost the same. Would you be jumping up and down saying that is impossible? Of course not. It is the +25 that seems to have you bent out of shape.

Now I have currently made 191 wagers. I am not +25 but as of this moment +7. But what if I was +25 after 191 wagers. That would be 108-83. Same +25, but that would be a win % of 56%. According to you it would be impossible for a player to win 56%. Come on man. You just aren't familiar with the volume wagering that I am doing. And that is because AI am doing something not traditional sports betting where the player needs to pick winner. My +EV comes from the bonus money. I just need to get a lot of play in, again something you are not familiar with.

What is I had never said +25, but just said I am off to a great start and hitting at 64% after two weeks. Same 56-31 record. I don't think you would have said no one can hit at 64% for two weeks, because again, I offer the 5-3 scenario. So just stop. You are just not familiar with a player volume betting, making this volume of wagers. I just happened to use 3 methods of making my picks that ran well the first couple weeks.

 

Blackhole, you are not even worth responding to anymore, but I will just for the hell of it.

I am still playing blackjack every week. Averaging 13 hours a week on Friday and Saturday nights. I play differently than I used to. Fewer hours, fewer rounds, but higher stakes (during busier times), so the EV is somewhat close to how I used to play. If you need numbers I am up 61k with 10 weekends left. Add in the supplemental things I am doing and I expect to hit or be near 100k. Same range I have averaged for 14 years in Vegas. Not a damn thing has changed. Blackjack is my primary source of income with some supplemental AP stuff. I just don't talk about it much, as doing so hasn't been beneficial to me. You haters both here and at VCT seem to think that hating on me changes something about who I am and what I do, and what I make. It doesn't. Not in the least bit.

 

You've gotta be kidding. Have you never taken a statistics course?

You used three methods. To arrive at +25 after a hundred plays using those three methods was way, way, way odds against. If you don't get that, I can't help you. I recommend a basic course in statistics. Probability Made Clear is available with The Great Courses.

Online Course on Probability - How to Calculate the Chances of an Outcome (thegreatcourses.com)

Your "EV comes from bonuses." That's your rationale for tossing away a +25? You cannot be this naive. You realize you come across as full of yourself after the +25, not recognizing how fortunate you were, and/or being an addict?

First off, technically, you are using calculations for random events as a way to calculate non-random events. You shouldn't even be using the term "EV" for these calculations. Use something else. "My opinion" or "What I think" would be appropriate substitutes.

Why would you keep betting the same angles, or your opinions, at +25 after 90 or 100 plays to work off a bonus? Why would you not bank the +25 and move the action into the low-risk category?

I guess, if I were you, I would go on a quest to make sure no poor souls out there reading this fall for your arguments and general bad habits.

Fortunately, to quote Gone with the Wind, I really don't give a damn. If people are stupid enough to follow in your footsteps, God bless them.

These posts will exist in perpetuity. I can stop here. I rest my case.

 

Do these numbers factor in your windfall from the casino settlement? After all that was directly involved with your BJ play.

Also not to worry about us knowing all about you. "who you are" A COCKSUCKING QUEER "what you do" COMPULSIVE LIE" "what you make" OTHER MEN COME.

 

KJ, don't waste your time with blackhole: he's just lonely.

Let him suffer...

 

I have to point something out here. I just snapped to it. I should have noticed it when I first seen the stats. But I'm 70 years old, not in good shape, my brain tires easily these days. And I've never taken courses in probability theory. So it took me awhile to snap to it.

We have an error in KJ's numbers. I don't think KJ has noticed it yet.

So, redietz, since you have taken the best mathematics and probability courses I'll give you the honor of telling KJ what his error was. With your reputation you carry much more credibility than I the uneducated koot.

redietz, it would not be possible that YOU missed seeing this statistical error. As you've said, you are just to sharp.

So please enlighten KJ as to what his error was. I will wait patiently for you to explain it to him.

 

Redietz's "bank the +25 wins" comment sounds like some kind of "quit while ahead" type voodoo someone like the late Alan Mendelson would have said.