Blackjack KewlJ

Lacking any clarification from MDawg so far, my response would be: SO WHAT! AP's for decades have always added in the self-value of their hotel rooms, comped food, comped shows, and anything else they received along the way, into their reported winning. And while you would never admit to that, what's to say you don't value your sunny days of gambling at close to $100k/year?

Lesson: you can't hypothesize how you want things to be based on your hate, jealousy, or other biases. If wizard truly did see that MDawg had been lying all along, he'd have banned him on the spot with the nuclear option. In MDawg's current thread that you obviously follow like an envious hawk, has wizard posted anything about it being fake or inconsistent with what he's seen in the past?

The true facts are what the overall picture turns out to be, and not what a little wreck like you asserts. Can you explain WHY MDawg supposedly admitted his cash winnings were off? And don't claim it was because of you and your "I know MGM execs who handed me over everything about MDawg 's play". If that were true he'd have sued you and these "big shots" would be fired and in jail.

Splain it.

 

Rob, you know where we stand. But it appears “MDawg” has been banned from Vegas casinos for winning too much.

While I can’t prove he is also the guy posting as “Christopher Mitchell”, it appears they are one and the same and all the winning has caught up with him. I’ll admit I was wrong about all his claims, so congratulations are due for his uncanny abilities. Like MDawg, Mr Mitchell beat the casinos for years at Baccarat and Blackjack for years for tens of thousands a week and was comped for it at levels I’ll admit average Joe’s like me could ever understand.

And as Mr Mitchell has denied doing gay porn under the Kyle Prescott name despite clear evidence to the contrary, it does show he has used multiple names in the past.

Despite all your disagreements with KJ, I hope you look closer at the guy you are defending on here. As far as I know, you, I or KJ never made a dollar off any wagers or claims on these forums. Can Mr Mitchell or the guy posting as “MDawg” claim the same?

 

Comp hustling is a form of advantage play. It gets tricky because the value of comps is far less than the value the casinos mark up the value as. So the REAL value is probably far less than a player loses to earn those inflated comps. Either way a person can not live off comped casino meals and gifts.

And no Rob, I don't know a single AP, playing for a living that will play for say 3 hours, lose $800, but because they were comped overpriced room and meals, report that as a winning session. That does not qualify as REAL advantage play.

Now it isn't my job to guess what this dude or any other is doing, nor figure out their scam or the reason for their false claim. I am just here to say so-and-so's claims as written are BS, because they defy math and/or reality. As a real player it is my right to make that call.

 

Your recap is not the truth, it's a fabrication...just your imagination, running away with you.

Your fabricated (and debunked) "look" at gambling records was only claimed to be from Cosmo,
not all the casinos MDawg played at during that period.

And MDawg's post on WOV was before your fabricated "release", not days after.

More proof that you're not capable of posting truthfully.

 

Responded to these incorrect assertions at VCT a couple minutes ago.

 

KJ writes: Comp hustling is a form of advantage play. It gets tricky because the value of comps is far less than the value the casinos mark up the value as. So the REAL value is probably far less than a player loses to earn those inflated comps. Either way a person can not live off comped casino meals and gifts.

Taters says: I've always likened it to being on scholarship. My out of pocket expense for meals is practically nothing. I go to shows/concerts/events usually for free. I'm a small-timer compared to Mdawg. But I get all I want and more than I need.

A couple of casinos here comps sports bets.

 

I'm not up on all this stuff boz so I really can't say much. I'm not supporting what MDawg claims as much as I am trying to get kew to tell the truth about his accusations, which he obviously can't. Either way, I have a real life to get to while kew has only this.

 

The kewl-j tellin me stuff what I never knew before. I never knew that joint in the Las Vegas give a cat the gavel after winnings a certain level. And I gotta say the 50k number seem chincy and light cuz for a guy with a 500$ bet that is just one hundreds units profits.Oh well, up here joints can't give a c at the gavel just for winnings well and regular, hey hey.

 

Boz. I'm ditto on this one. My issue is lies were made about me. And what purpose was it to serve?

 

deleted

 

That is not exactly what I said Soxfan. There is a very big difference between a player flat betting $500 and a card counter spreading to $500. The flat better's average bet is $500. The card counter spreading to $500 has an average bet of $150 or so, maybe less depending on the exact spread.

So for a card counter who the casino might suspect of playing with an advantage just because of the spread, but maybe haven't been able to confirm it with an evaluation, because the player is careful to play short sessions, hitting that $50k threshold, which is more than 300 average bets of $150, will confirm what they haven't been otherwise able to confirm.

It is all part of the cat and mouse game. A player needs to know what the number the casino has for his lifetime win, so he can do whatever necessary to stop that number from growing to that threshold that draws extra attention. It doesn't mean he is not still trying to win, but he is going to have to engage in some more rat-holing and things of that nature to make it appear he is not winning.

 

Jeez Louise - all you have to do is barely scan through the doggerel this UNKewl one posts to know that he is merely reading out of a playbook he never in fact played. I mean the nervous has never described a single actual hand of Blackjack he ever played. You'd think by now that something would have stuck in his memory.

accountinquestion on the UNKewl one: Literally, your story is something anyone who cares enough could figure out via books and reading the internet. While I find your stuff interesting to read, you've never said anything interesting except for some story you told me in private. I believed it but now I wonder if I wasn't just fed bullshit. At the time I thought you were a legitimate person and have taken things from that convo as true. I now believe this was a mistake.

 

In blackjack every hand is routine. You see every hand a million times. Only a losing player gets all excited reciting that they had a 20 only to have the dealer pull a 5 card 21. That crap happens all the time. I see it all the time. Nothing even remotely odd or unusual about any of it. I guess about the most unusual thing in blackjack is when you split, let's say a pair of 3's vs the dealer 5, you draw another 3 that you split again, and then draw a 7 and 8 to a couple of those 3's for double down. So you have 5 times your original wager, all dependent on what the dealer pulls. And even that is not unusual. I see those kinds of situations multiple times every time I play.

It so happens if when that situation occurs with max bet out, that single hand will go a long way to determining how that particular session ends up, winning or losing, but it is not unusual. 3 blackjack's in a row. Had it happen to me probably 50 times. 4 blackjack's in a row. Maybe 3 or 4 times. The dealer had 4 blackjacks in a row. A few times, but I usually don't stay for the 4th because after 2 or 3 dealer blackjacks the count is probably negative and good time to exit.

So there is just nothing....no hand that is so unusual that I feel the need to recite it like OMG this happened.

But if it is so important to you, I'll tell you one that I consider very interesting. It occurred back in 2011 on a shoe that I won 20k in one shoe, which at my level of play is a lot. I wrote about it at WoV and one of the blackjack sites at the time. So from the time the count was positive enough (advantage enough) that I was max betting I didn't lose a hand. Pushed two hands and won maybe 35. It was one of those pushed hands that was special. I had a 2 card total of 10 (I think an 8 and a 2) and the dealer had a 10 showing.

So 10 vs dealer 10. Basic strategy says to hit. Not many people, even card counters are aware that at a true count of +5 or more the proper play is to double down. So the count was way above +5, maybe +8 or so. The play should have been to double down. But by that time, I was winning so much that my play had drawn attention from several pit people. I decided to just hit instead of double down. Which in hindsight was silly, because most pit people know about 2 index plays if that and certainly not one as obscure and infrequent as doubling 10 vs 10.

So anyway, I hit instead of doubling down, which the count really called for. I drew a 3 I think and then drew again, a 7 for 20. Dealer turned over his 10 for a 20 and a push. But had I doubled which the count called for I would have lost 2 times my max bet instead of pushing. Not a huge thing, but in the context that I didn't lose a hand in that shoe, kind of memorable for me. The other kind of amazing thing about that shoe is out of all the hands I won with my max bet, I received zero blackjacks which of course pay 3-2. I mean with all those additional 10's and aces in the deck at the times, you would have expected a couple blackjack. No blackjack's but 35 winning hands.

So there is something memorable to me, but there just aren't many unusual hands and situations in blackjack. I have seen it all a million times. No need to recount hands that are basically routine.

 

I've recounted some incredible things that happened to me at the Blackjack tables, at these forums. You obviously haven't played much if at all. Just repeating what you read in a book in a generic fashion. Your Blackjack generic discussions about Blackjack in general are dull because, you're dull, and you bet very little and rarely win. (There's not much to talk about in the locker room if you've never actually played.)

accountinquestion on the UNKewl one: Rob would probably be far more fun to hang out with than you

On the other hand...you will spend VOLUMES writing...about me! "The Great MDawg." Now there's someone who has actually lived, and the UNKewl one begs to live vicariously through MDawg, as do some others.

 

KJ writes: So 10 vs dealer 10. Basic strategy says to hit. Not many people, even card counters are aware that at a true count of +5 or more the proper play is to double down. So the count was way above +5, maybe +8 or so. The play should have been to double down. But by that time, I was winning so much that my play had drawn attention from several pit people. I decided to just hit instead of double down. Which in hindsight was silly, because most pit people know about 2 index plays if that and certainly not one as obscure and infrequent as doubling 10 vs 10.

So anyway, I hit instead of doubling down, which the count really called for. I drew a 3 I think and then drew again, a 7 for 20. Dealer turned over his 10 for a 20 and a push.

Tater says: Hmmm. Must have been some middle cards in the shoe. Lol

 

This seemingly meaningless statement tells the whole story. From the day you announced the title of your..whatever it is, containing the word "adventure", anyone with half a brain knew the story, this tale, would be at best half truths and exaggerations, at worst just made up BS to get the attention you seek and need. Gambling is not exciting for professional players and AP's. It is a way to make a living. It is only exciting to losing players. That is who finds gambling exciting.

And when you started all that crap of following Alexa rating and views for forums and threads for when you post vs when you didn't post, it only confirmed what most people knew...that this was all about attention. This great adventure might as well be Jack and the beanstalk.

Now I on the other hand, a real player who shares my experiences, will on a forum or a thread that has almost no views. I don't care about attention. I am sharing something that may help someone who reads, maybe some lurker type that reads but rarely participates. Maybe someone that comes along 3 months from now or next year and is reading through the archieves and says "oh yeah, that is how it works. That makes sense".

That is the difference between a real player sharing experiences that some other player may benefit from and a guy making up stories because he seeks attention, views and ratings.

 

I tend to remember loss rather than good fortune. With a column count, I'd seen 15 of the 16. 2-5s come out. I bet two hands at max. They don't allow the 2nd hand to be viewed until the 1st hand is completed. I had the equivalent of two 10's. Dealer had a 6 up. I didn't want to split the 10's because of pit concerns. So I tucked. 2nd hand was the same as the 1st. Tucked again.

Dealer flips an A in the hole and hits with a 4. The only card in the deck that could beat me. Just did. Had I split I would won 4 hands at max instead of losing two.

What a pisser! A six hand turnaround.

 

Yeah that's called "selective memory". It is just the way it works...you remember the bad hands and swings more than the good of equal amounts. That is why I try not to dwell on any of it. As soon as the hand is done, I try to move on. As soon as the session is done, I try to move on. The only thing I want to make note of is anything unusual that occurred with pit or dealer interaction that I might want to make note of for future reference.

Now back to this double 10 vs dealer 10. It is part of Don Schlesinger's Illustrious 18. Just one some players don't remember and some choose not to play it because they don't see the real advantage. But it is actually #6 of 18 in most advantageous plays, so top third. Don has an index for doubling of +4, but I think he later came up with a risk adverse index of +5 or +6.

But there is a reason why it is best to make that play early, +4, even +3.5. Even if making the double just short of what the count calls for, it will only cost pennies. Basically almost a toss up. And in any toss up situation you want to make the play that can potentially save a card or two. Doubling will use 1 card. Hitting could lead to hitting a second or third time, using 2 or 3 total cards.

You don't want to make the wrong play that costs any real EV, but if it is truly borderline decision or close to it, do what saves a card or two. When playing heads up, saving a card or two can mean an extra round. Saving 3 or 4 cards during the course of the shoe can lead to 2 extra rounds. A couple extra rounds at the end of a shoe with a significantly plus or advantageous count, can really add up.

 

As much as the UNKewl one lifts what he has to say about Blackjack from books, he forgot to lift this reality from a movie.

In Confessions of a Winning Poker Player, Jack King said,
"Few players recall big pots they have won, strange as it seems,
but every player can remember with remarkable accuracy...
the outstanding tough beats of his career."
Seems true to me. 'Cause walking in here,
I can hardly remember how I built my bankroll,
but I can't stop thinking of how I lost it.

accountinquestion on the UNKewl one: Literally, your story is something anyone who cares enough could figure out via books and reading the internet. While I find your stuff interesting to read, you've never said anything interesting except for some story you told me in private. I believed it but now I wonder if I wasn't just fed bullshit. At the time I thought you were a legitimate person and have taken things from that convo as true. I now believe this was a mistake.

mickeycrimm on the UNKewl one: We have a fraudster thats been calling others fraudsters for quite awhile. WTF?

 

KJ writes: Now back to this double 10 vs dealer 10.

Tater says: 10vs10 is a puzzle. I thought it was interesting that 2 Littles, 2 middles, and 2 10s came out at such a high count. To win 35 hands in a shoe and no blackjacks, the dealer must have been getting alot of middles.

If you were playing straight up and doubled. You'd have lost and started your next hand with a 7.