Is FLASH Lying?

It Still Doesn't Add Up

Flash, I think you are generally well-intentioned, but grossly misrepresent your winnings.

In your Sept. 2007 Green Chip post you wrote:
I felt it would be less than honest to exclude my early years

Now you are claiming your average win applies only to the last eight years:
I turned Pro in 1992,
even though you wrote:
Yes, in the last 18 years I had 3 years where the casinos kicked my skinny butt.
I have averaged $46.5K per annum (losing years included)
http://www.bj21.com/boards/free/free_board/index.cgi?read=162458

But it still doesn't add up since 1992.

In 2008 you earned $19,650 in approximately 276 hours.
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?p=117424&highlight=2008#post117424

In 2009 you earned $53,000 in 960 hours and wrote:
I had a rip-roaring best year in a decade.
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?p=166463&highlight=year#post166463

If your rip-roaring best year in a decade was $53K, then there is no way you averaged $46.5K with any losing years included. That $19,650 in 2008 brings down your average enough already. You would need every year to be rip-roaring to average $46.5K with a $19,650 thrown in.

In other words, it just doesn't add up. I think you got lucky last year and have rosy memories. This is exactly the kind of overconfidence that caused you to overbet before.

The final CLARIFICATION

When I said �I had a rip-roaring best year in a decade� that is where the problem began.
As I had noted, my result for 2008 was anemic. I had health problems that year.

The 2009 results were almost three times as profitable, prompting me to say �best year�, but It was the best compared to the prior year. In my mind I was focusing on the life-saving surgery that I had had a decade prior, with the health issues of 2008 being related to that�; thus I had typed what i was thinking - �decade� The inaccuracy is mine. Being �at death�s door� can haver lasting effects.

Perhaps the real question is � what motivates someone to attack others so vociferously?
Obviously the anonymity of the �net permits it; but some peeps pull the wings off of flies, don�t they?

As I had suspected from the start, this malevolent attempt at character assassination IS the result of an unedited post and no more than that.

Incidentally, I NEVER received, from Kim Lee, an email or P.M. inquiry re: this �seeming� contradiction.

Most of my friends just shrug their shoulders and mutter words to the effect � �He ought to get a life�, �What a *******�, etc.

Corrections

I read that basic strategy was developed nearly 40 years ago.

It's older than that. "The Optimum Strategy in Blackjack" was published by Roger Baldwin in 1956.

Millions of simulations were done to achieve the best possible strategy for each and every hand possible.

No, basic strategy is derived from using combinatorial analysis, where every possible outcome is evaluated.

All the results are based if the cards were evenly distributed.

Again no. Basic strategy takes into account all the possible distributions.

This author was claiming that because in black jack the cards are rarely evenly distributed as play continues and basic strategy can not be used for every hand.

Of course, you can use basic strategy on every hand. You just might not be maximizing your EV.

He said that you should alter your play based on what has come out; much like card counting offers.

Not much like, but exactly like.

He also mentions that card counting doesn't allow a very large advantage either and that all the methods we are using today are dated.

True, it's not a large advantage, but it's better than the alternative (i.e., the house having the advantage.)

The Pythogorean theorem is also dated, but we still use it.

The verdict

What is the verdict so far in the case of Kim vs Flash?

  

    

    

  Jurists in favor of  Flash  

    

1 ) Jason  

2 ) Revereman  

3 ) Snapper  

4 ) Salmon  

5 ) BjCobb  

6 ) 21-4me  

7 )   

8 )   

9 )   

    

  Jurists in support of Kim  

1 )   

2 )   

3 )   

4 )   

5 )   

6 )   

7 )   

8 )   

9 )   

  

This case reminds me of Shadroch vs Flash on December 21st, 2008, 02:47 AM. It also reminds me of O J Simpson vs Goldman in 1995. It further reminds me of the famous Billy Clinton vs the Senate --- Loyalists supported Billy unconditionally during the Impeachment. Unless it's at the precipice, loyalty to a friend or to a party usually prevails over righteousness.

hey-

make it end already!