Tell me this post is a joke
You wouldn't kid another brother would you OS?
You wouldn't kid another brother would you OS?
J Morgan (and others) so he can prevent a future PPE incident.
Puuhleeeeese!
For the Big 3 Liberal Triad to come on here and tell people who know what the real deal is, tell people who actually enter a casino more than once every three months how to act and what they should do, is an insult to our intelligence.
Who is coming here and telling you anything??
Stop secretly reading Green Chip posts (you are not a Green Chip member, are you??), and maybe you will have more time to devote to your blackjack.
as Tattoo is a high-caliber pro (in the same league as a Grosjean)
with 10+ years of REAL world experience and you know as well as anyone that authority isn't always fair or doesn't always follow the rules being a brother and all. Well being a big-money pro in many casinos (when they figure you out), in many cases you have about as many rights as a black man at a KKK conference no matter what adhoc or ML say.
And don't forget a while back when claimed J Morgan's numbers were wrong and to be schooled even though he was SO SURE he was right.
and even a few REAL pros have joined.
And several have been kicked off.
Orange County KO, how could you let Adhoc win post of the month? I've heard of someone slipping, but this is ridiculous.
The following are actual numbers based on previous posts:
# of times Adhoc has been backroomed = 0
# of times Boot has been backroomed = 0
# of times ML has been backroomed = 0
# of cases involving advantage play handled by Adhoc = 0
# of cases involving advantage play handled by Boot = 0
# of cases involving advantage play handled by ML = 0
The following are reasonable estimates based on previous posts and conversations:
lifetime blackjack profits from Adhoc =~ -$5,000
lifetime blackjack profits from Boot =~ $0
lifetime blackjack profits from ML =~ $5,000
lifetime hours card counting from Adhoc =~ 150
lifetime hours card counting from Boot =~ 200
lifetime hours card counting from ML =~ 400
Such experience, such wisdom, such results!
I spotted him at Casino Royale not too long ago. I hovered in the background and watched him spread from $10 to $90 at the DD table - that $90 was a nice touch, avoids the "checks play" call.
What it would take is the following:
- An experienced Nevada criminal attorney to ensure that the elements of the false arrest offense are met, IE: what constitutes a detention, etc;
- Credible witnesses and documentation of the events;
- An experienced civil attorney to document the actions of the casino and law enforcement officials before, during and after the event;
- A player with credibility willing and able to run the gauntlet in the process.
If a player is to try doing this on their own it would get into a he said-she said pissing contest and the casino would most likely be deemed the more "credible" complainant.
A comparison could be: a cop is sent to a residence were an assault was reported. The rich owner says that the other party, who he's never met, walked into his house and when the owner confronted, the second party took a swing at him. The second party (of unknown background), tells the cops that he walked into the residence by accident and the owner jumped him, assaulted him, and wants charges filed: Based on the brief scenerio, who's the cop to believe?
Just my humble opinion.
saying they would not post anymore and even duped thier fellow GC'ers into thinking they got fired.
Also, D. Mathews does not discourage nor does anything to prevent anyone from signing up under an alias (which a prudent pro should do anyway if he choses to join)
the fact is that red chippers don't really see the types of backoffs pertinent to this thread, so they have pretty much 0 experience in this matter compared to a larger betting/winning player.
you don't seem to get it. the size of your nose is not relevant to the way cops behave in Las Vegas. asking a cop to arrest someone for false arrest is not relevant to the way cops behave in las vegas. because it won't have any effect. asking a dealer to reveal his her hole card won't actually reveal the hole card.
you remind me of doug grant. he refused to discuss things everybody knew to be true. he focused on credentials rather than what was at issue. and insisted card counting would not work irregardless of evidence to the contrary. i don't care how brilliant you think your attorny is or what his other credentials are. i am only concerned for the purposes of this discussion with what actually happens with respect to cops and casinos. if you think the cops are actually going to arrest security guards i have a plan for a perpetual motion machine i want to sell you.
... at the Casino Royale any time recently. The last time I was in there, I was taking advantage of the coupon offer and flat-betting the coupon max.
I make no claims to being as skilled as the players you mentioned. There are plenty of players who are probably better than me. You have never seen me claim otherwise.
Even if I could earn what I make in my job, including benefits, I still wouldn't want to be a professional gambler. It is not a lifestyle that I have any desire to lead. Spending that many hours in casinos is not something I would want to do. The travel, the boredom, the time it would take to find and exploit good games, putting up with the general flow of jerks on both sides of the tables, the games one must play to avoid backoffs are not the stuff of any dreams I have ever had.
Aside from that, I have a job that I truly love. It is never boring, it pays well, and what I do makes a difference in the lives of the people I represent. If, for some reason, I was no longer able to do this job, there are other jobs I'd look at first before I would want to gamble for a living. It's just not my cup of tea as a means of livelihood. It is an avocation for me. I can take it in small doses, but I'd never want to do it full-time.
I like to fish too. That doesn't mean that I have ever had any desire to be on the North Atlantic catching cod for a living.
You are at least partially right. I have never been illegally detained in a casino. I cannot speak for adhoc and ML. I am not a lawyer, so I have never handled a case in any court. Once again, I cannot speak for adhoc and ML. As for earnings, you are way off on what I have earned, so I can presume that you are just as far off for adhoc and ML.
If you have been reading the posts I have made on this subject, you can see disclaimers throughout. There is no way to know if a citizen's arrest would work or not. As I have said, it would depend on the player, the casino and the situtation. However, the law is the law and to discount it out of hand because you or someone you know has had some bad experiences at the hands of the Las Vegas police is not necessarily a wise course.
I have been "homered" more than once in my career with law enforcement officials and security goons, and these are people who play a much tougher game than any of the modern-day casinos play. Nightsticks and baseball bats are de rigeur for some of these people. You would be surprised about what the law can accomplish sometimes in these situations. Will you prevail every time? No. Is it possible to prevail? Yes.
By the way, how many times have you been backroomed?
For the Big 3 Liberal Triad to come on here and tell people who know what the real deal is ...
Now we finally get to the real deal. You don't like our politics.
It would be nice to be prescient and know exactly what is going to happen in Court. Most of we lawyers wish we were as gifted as you at that.
Not being prescient, most of us prefer any advantage we might could find. If you really read what is posted rather than lashing out, I remarked there would be no loss legally and there "may" be a gain in litigation. Your proposition is there is no way there might be a gain, thus claiming an omnipotence of which I am skeptical.
It is hilarious for someone who calls himself "Credibility Checker" to make a post wherein he simply fabricates out of whole cloth the "facts" to support his argument. There is that school of debate that says if the facts aren't on your side, make them up, but it doesn't serve to add to one's credibility.
"Credibility Checker" indeed.
