That some of the people who are so outraged at my description of peekers as cheaters didn't express a fraction of that outrage at posters who call counters who play by the rules (and are skilled enough to win without cheating) "morons".
I did not say card counters are morons. I count myself occassionally and spent over 1500 hours at the tables counting cards professionally in addition to many more counting to supplement earnings from other techniques such as ace location. I recommend everyone learn to count in my book.
What I said was that any one who continues to count under the impression that "counting is a superior or even adequate form of advantage play is a moron". The edge obtainable from card counting is rarely more than about 0.5%. You need at least $20,000 to consider counting professionally. You may have losing years. The method is easy to detect. The technique is inferior to virtually every other conceivable form of advantage play in pure mathematical terms (video poker would be the exception, can't think of any others offhand).
No one and I do mean no one, recommends counting by itself as an option for a professional gambler, not Schlesinger, Wong, Snyder and certainly not me. Any one who aspires to be a professional counter, relying on that technique alone for profits, in the current climate, is by definition not intelligent to be one.
to say "rarely".
where i'm from the edge from counting is rarely AS LOW as .5% and will rarely be more than 2%.
If you play exclusively against pitch games in Nevada, or perhaps against very good rules such as in Russia or Belgium you can do much better than 0.5%. But getting away with it is much harder in these locations, and even a 2% edge is pretty poor compared to the edge from other forms of advantage play.
I very much doubt the average counter plays with an edge of more than .5%.
" And, frankly, any one who is still counting in the mistaken impression that is a superior or even adequate form of advantage play is a moron."
I did NOT make such a degrading statement and anyone who here who knows me already knows this. Before you start pulling quotes you need to understand what you're reading instead of rushing through post at a frantic pace. The qoute was an opinion of John May and if you SLOWLY re-read my post you will understand that I DISAGREE with him to my full hearts content.
You know are trying to backlash and re-posting(complaining) what you assume to be my opinion. You also assume that everyone who disagrees with you is a either a troll or a shill,when YOU and yourself are walking this fine line of being a troll. Your post will show many inconsistentcies that dont make sense. Let's see, if I remember correctly you said intelligent people dont count cards anymore, blackjack is dead,seeing the dealers hole card is cheating,blah,blah, counting cards is a waste of time,there is easier ways to make money,which is it(craps,roulette,6/5,caribean poker,bigwheel,pai gow,bac,slots,vp,etc.,pick your poison,which is it? Then at the same time you claim blackjack is a waste of time and not worth it you just so happen to say you know 270 index numbers and is it the Uston APC or the RPC system. Some of these indices you might only use once in a liftime!
There, are just too many inconsistencies to your stories that dont make much sense. The fact that you are emotionaly disturbed about us getting a peak at the dealers hole card once in a great while and calling us cheaters leads me to believe you are NOT a blackjack player but perhaps a losing ploppy that has secrets. Actually I'm thinking about using a wheelchair this week,after searching for several months me finnally found a very vulnerable victim,just think, I could go down in the Guiness Book of World Records as being known for sneaking in the largest cheating device in casino history and getting away with it...you've surely heard of the old saying "I can drag an elephant across the table and they wouldn't even see it!"
Just another note before I comfortize my wheelchair sir.. The exact people you have been arguing and pouting with all have a common agreement amongst yourselves, which is "There are easier and better ways to make bigger bucks than card counting!!" OK,I give up,what is it.
Care to explain why? No, thought not, because there isn't a shred of evidence to the contrary. That is why your post has no text.
John, I think you sincerely and gradually have been losing the credibility of your statements in respect to blackjack. Maybe the internet gaming industry has convinced you card counting is useless,Idont know, but what I do know, is you're letting something get your head that's shunning card counting. One way to look at it is, you can represent your knowledge about Europe, but you lack the experience of card counting in the USA to make such degrading statements. I believe you are misleading card counters. Sure'I have other advantages,but card counting is definitley my bread and butter.If all USA casinos banned blackjack tomorrow,then It would no longer worth my while to vist them...that's it,game is over.
What are these?
...So don't patronize me. I lived in LV for several years and played very intensively. Nationality is not the issue here. Cold, hard fact and data is the issue.
The internet gambling industry is a chaotic sprawling mess incapable of tieing its own shoelaces, let alone convincing me of anything.
"I did NOT make such a degrading statement and anyone who here who knows me already knows this."
No, you repeated a quote by someone else as a way of both flaming that person and feeding the trolls who you knew would use your post as a way to advance their agendas.
"The fact that you are emotionaly disturbed about us getting a peak at the dealers hole card once in a great while and calling us cheaters"
I see you don't know how to read either. I was NEVER disturbed at players being able to peek at hole cards, nor did I call them "cheaters" (at least until I was personally attacked). What I said was that peeking at the hole card is cheating. And quite frankly, my mind could've been changed if my opponants had stuck with debating the issue rather than resorting to attacks.
"Let's see, if I remember correctly you said intelligent people dont count cards anymore, blackjack is dead,seeing the dealers hole card is cheating,blah,blah, counting cards is a waste of time,there is easier ways to make money,which is it(craps,roulette,6/5,caribean poker,bigwheel,pai gow,bac,slots,vp,etc.,pick your poison,which is it?"
I never said that those easier ways of making money were inside of a casino.
"Then at the same time you claim blackjack is a waste of time and not worth it you just so happen to say you know 270 index numbers and is it the Uston APC or the RPC system."
As a card counter and frequent player I can see first-hand that the casinos are making life very hard for advantage players. I'm sure you can see it too. (BTW The system I use is Silver Fox)
"Some of these indices you might only use once in a liftime!"
And when that "once in a lifetime" situation pops up, I'll be ready with the correct decision. At the end of a million hand series, I want to know I made the correct decision every single hand that is humanly possible.
This is a bad climate:6d,DAS,DOA,BJ 3:2,70% pen.,charlie paid 2xtable max.,777 paid 1 x table max.?
I don't think you've ever explained why in anything you state.
". The edge obtainable from card counting is rarely more than about 0.5%."
Perhaps it is you who isn't capable of anything more. Even in the standard 6/8 dealt games of east US, you can obtain at least 1% edge. I consider this a lenient worldwide standard.
"No one and I do mean no one, recommends counting by itself as an option for a professional gambler, not Schlesinger, Wong, Snyder and certainly not me."
I want you to show me where I missed in print, where Wong and Schlesinger do not recommend professional counting by itself.
Perhaps it is you who isn't capable of anything more. Even in the standard 6/8 dealt games of east US, you can obtain at least 1% edge. I consider this a lenient worldwide standard.
Obtaining and getting are two very different things. Wong and various other pro players went on record as saying they managed to obtain about half their theoretical expected value at the tables.
Either way you can use whatever figure you like, 1% edge sucks, even 2%. It is still an order of magnitude too small considering the extreme variance involved.
I want you to show me where I missed in print, where Wong and Schlesinger do not recommend professional counting by itself.
Schlesinger says at the beginning of Blackjack Attack on the matter of whether any one could become a professional gambler that "you can but you probably shouldn't try". Wong devotes an entire chapter to the subject in "Blackjack Secrets" (haven't you read it?-I can't believe you missed it). His conclusion is that it is better to have blackjack as a secondary income.
In both cases, the fact that neither chooses to make a living at the the blackjack table is a bit of a giveaway that they don't recommend it.
It would be wrong to recommend one thing and do another don't you think?
with your peroration and nonsensical claims towards card counting
and the meager win rates associated with it, here online, I will
be forced to change my perception of you from "such a hell of nice
guy" into "as dangerous as a piranha in a bathroom". That will be
a sort of Faustian destiny, wouldn't it?
I know,I know, you won't mind.
Take care,anyway
Z
What you wrote below is plain wrong. Admit it and I will stop bothering you. Your whole thread's theme is the necessity for alternative advantage play techniques. I am shocked that you did not comprehend my last question.
No one and I do mean no one, recommends counting by itself as an option for a professional gambler, not Schlesinger, Wong, Snyder and certainly not me. Any one who aspires to be a professional counter, relying on that technique alone for profits, in the current climate, is by definition not intelligent to be one.
The method is easy to detect. The technique is inferior to virtually every other conceivable form of advantage play in pure mathematical terms (video poker would be the exception, can't think of any others offhand
How do you mean VPoker is inferior?in terms of win rates or variance?
What you wrote below is plain wrong.
No it isn't. I've just given you the references.
I will
be forced to change my perception of you from "such a hell of nice
guy" into "as dangerous as a piranha in a bathroom".
I like the second description better actually.
