Baccarat Coach's Challenge
Quote: darkozIt hereby submitted a formal motion to dismiss the challenge against Darkoz.
The Wizard has stated the quote of the challenge is "per forum rules"
Here are the forum rules.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/2-forum-rules/#post37215
Nowhere in any of the 20 posted rules are anything remotely addressing the conflict in question.
If it is believed this is in error, the specific forum rule is requested to be quoted.
link to original post
Quote: Rule 17Misquoting: If you quote another member, do not remove, add, or change any wording within the portion quoted. If you wish to emphasize a particular part of the quote, any formatting by the one quoting should be disclosed immediately after the quote. (Added 6/8/2018)
The method we will resolve this will go down per the method of rule 14 about private messages. This has happened before. You might argue the "coach's challenge" option doesn't apply to alleged false quotes, but I nowhere do the rules say I can't handle this the way I am.
Quote: darkoz
There was a gambler who claimed to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year
Eventually that claim was debunked.
link to original post
That said, the ball is in your court to prove both Mdawg, or any forum member, claimed "to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year " and furthermore that said claim was debunked.
You are not using exact quotes, but saying these events happened. Prove it.
Quote: MDawgPost it. Your claim was made publicly, the Coach's Challenge was made publicly, your evidence should be posted publicly too.
link to original post
Until otherwise ordered by the Wizard I don't have to post it publicly.
I have to prove this challenge to only one person and that is the Wizard who runs this site. You don't.
You raised a coaches challenge with the Wizard not the forum.
It is now up to the Wizard to weigh in on the proof.
What's the matter, you are worried?
The furtiveness of this action belies your claim that you are the "Most Feared AP on the East Coast." If you have nothing to fear, let your evidence be viewed.
Quote: Wizardthe ball is in your court to prove both Mdawg, or any forum member, claimed "to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year " and furthermore that said claim was debunked.
You are not using exact quotes, but saying these events happened. Prove it.
link to original post
Quote: MDawgYou're obviously worried that your "evidence" will be taken apart publicly. Anyway, I am sure the Wizard will post whatever you have sent to him because that's the way Coach's Challenges work, they are not conducted in secret. Or, he'll just issue a suspension of you without bothering to let me refute it because it's so weak.
link to original post
Most lawyers want their weak cases tried by the court of public opinion. (Like you are asking for)
I am confident enough in my evidence that I sent it to the judge.
If the judge rules in my favor the public will rightfully know without seeing the evidence that I was the victor and there will be nothing for them to tear apart.
Besides even if they were to tear it apart, the evidence only matters to the judge lol.
I ask again, you worried?
Quote: MDawg
The furtiveness of this action belies your claim that you are the "Most Feared AP on the East Coast." If you have nothing to fear, let your evidence be viewed.Quote: Wizardthe ball is in your court to prove both Mdawg, or any forum member, claimed "to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year " and furthermore that said claim was debunked.
You are not using exact quotes, but saying these events happened. Prove it.
link to original post
link to original post
LMFAO
If you truly have been paying attention to Advantage Play techniques it's that casinos fear me BECAUSE I am so furtive and secretive.
Like literally years of posts by AP's saying to be hush and you think AP's are feared when they are in the open?
Quote: billryanDon't write a check that you can't cover. You said something. It was obvious who you were referring to. Back it up or accept the consequences.
link to original post
Quote: billryanI'm not sure why that is difficult.
or why you feel the need to start extemporizing on this or that that has nothing to do with this. 😃 If you have the evidence you're in the right. If not, you'll be judged to have stated a falsehood. Not much more to it than that.
I would post what I had for all to see if I knew I was right. I'd try to hide it if I were embarrassed or unsure about it.
Plus, didn't you say
, if so, what's the fun in not opening the matter up to everyone. Methinks you're taking it more seriously than anyone, having already made a superfluous motion to dismiss it, and now trying to hide your evidence.Quote: darkozAnybody with a serious mind knows this whole challenge is a joke. I am having fun with it.
link to original post
Quote: MDawgQuote: billryanDon't write a check that you can't cover. You said something. It was obvious who you were referring to. Back it up or accept the consequences.
link to original postQuote: billryanI'm not sure why that is difficult.
link to original post
I am not certain what Bill's testimony has to do with this.
He is not an expert witness in this trial.
His testimony is not admissible.
Quote: MDawgQuote: billryanDon't write a check that you can't cover. You said something. It was obvious who you were referring to. Back it up or accept the consequences.
link to original postQuote: billryanI'm not sure why that is difficult.
or why you feel the need to start extemporizing on this or that that has nothing to do with this. 😃 If you have the evidence you're in the right. If not, you'll be judged to have stated a falsehood. Not much more to it than that.
I would post what I had for all to see if I knew I was right. I'd try to hide it if I were embarrassed or unsure about it.
Plus, didn't you say, if so, what's the fun in not opening the matter up to everyone. Methinks you're taking it more seriously than anyone, having already made a superfluous motion to dismiss it, and now trying to hide your evidence.Quote: darkozAnybody with a serious mind knows this whole challenge is a joke. I am having fun with it.
link to original post
link to original post
The evidence is not hidden. It's been handed over to the Wizard.
And nothing is more fun than watching you stew over what evidence I have
Quote: MentalHear ye! Hear ye!
His majesty [referring to MDawg?] hath decreed
link to original post
But now the emperor hath left "his" thread and felt the need to let us know about it.
Quote: MentalI feel the need to unsubscribe from my own thread for now. Y'all have fun.
link to original post
Is it going to be mayhem now?
Quote: darkozQuote: MDawgPresent it. Someone who claimed to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year and that eventually that claim was debunked.
I assume that if you drag this out with your trying to question the Wizard's authority at his own forum, that you'll end up with a longer sentence.
link to original post
Got ya scared, huh?
Well the evidence will be presented once the request for the forum rules cited and their validity to this claim is decided by the Wizard.
The Wizard has specifically cited forum rules. It is now for him to point to the specific forum rule he refers to.
link to original post
Darkoz, I usually don't add input to these types of things but I must on this one. It does seem like you are trying to weasel out of this. If you can show someone said they beat baccarat everyday just post it
Quote: DRichQuote: darkozQuote: MDawgPresent it. Someone who claimed to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year and that eventually that claim was debunked.
I assume that if you drag this out with your trying to question the Wizard's authority at his own forum, that you'll end up with a longer sentence.
link to original post
Got ya scared, huh?
Well the evidence will be presented once the request for the forum rules cited and their validity to this claim is decided by the Wizard.
The Wizard has specifically cited forum rules. It is now for him to point to the specific forum rule he refers to.
link to original post
Darkoz, I usually don't add input to these types of things but I must on this one. It does seem like you are trying to weasel out of this. If you can show someone said they beat baccarat everyday just post it
link to original post
I am not weaseling out of anything.
I am only required at this time to submit my evidence to the Wizard.
If that changes then I will post publicly.
Quote: darkoz
I am only required at this time to submit my evidence to the Wizard.
Have you provided that information to the Wizard showing where the member said he could beat it everyday yet? I was under the assumption that you had not and were waiting on other clarification.
Quote: DRichQuote: darkoz
I am only required at this time to submit my evidence to the Wizard.
Have you provided that information to the Wizard showing where the member said he could beat it everyday yet? I was under the assumption that you had not and were waiting on other clarification.
link to original post
That is correct. The clarification was made already.
I submitted a photo of the actual post to the Wizard (I assume mentioning that isn't violation of PM discussion)
I am awaiting his judgement.
Also am waiting whether the evidence needs to be posted publicly.
Quote: MDawgQuote: MentalHear ye! Hear ye!
His majesty [referring to MDawg?] hath decreed
link to original post
But now the emperor hath left "his" thread and felt the need to let us know about it.Quote: MentalI feel the need to unsubscribe from my own thread for now. Y'all have fun.
link to original post
Is it going to be mayhem now?
link to original post
This is so like gloating as to be insulting.
For the record I not only originally requested this part of the thread be divided out but I also sent a personal apology to Mental for the subsequent hijacking. I can't divulge what he said as that would be in violation of PM rules but it was gracious in return.
This post above shows no remorse in my opinion highlighting that "his majesty " refers to MDawg followed by Mental’s resignation from the thread.
EDIT: In hindsight I should have done what Mental did when he started this thread. He said he started it to avoid hijacking someone else's. I thought the mods would divide it out and was a bit surprised when they basically kicked it down the road. I thought it would be presumptuous on my part to start a thread on someone else's challenge to me. Oh well live and learn. Hopefully however it goes, Mental returns to discuss his online methods.
That post was thrilling in its scorn and deserved a rebuke to the person who made it and then bowed out, even calling this thread “his” on the way out - in the past mods have made it clear that no thread “belongs” to the person who started it.
Please stand by.
edit:
Quote: unJonQuote: billryanDon't write a check that you can't cover. You said something. It was obvious who you were referring to. Back it up or accept the consequences. I'm not sure why that is difficult.
link to original post
Wasn’t he referring to the guy that got banned from here years ago for claiming to beat baccarat and then admitting he lied? Forget his name.
link to original post
No. That guy claimed he only started playing after reading someones posts.
Yes, I'll admit was glancing at the forum myself while logged out and working on something unrelated, but it was out of curiosity when I noticed how often the Oz was logged on and stayed logged on. And when you checked the forum first thing just after midnight, of the very small handful of members who had already logged in for January 5th, whose name was already there? DarkOz.
I don't believe this is usual behavior for him. Even when he and I have gone at it over something or other, given that he's on +3 East Coast time from where I usually am, I notice that he calls it a WOV night and is gone by around 8 or 9pm PST until the next morning. The Oz has def been hard at work at something or other WOV related the past 24 hours or so!
Quote: MDawg
I glanced at the forum a number of times last night while logged out and each time I looked, D.Oz was logged in. As someone would say, "What does that tell you?" Obviously this matter is on his mind I've never noticed him logged in and out all night before, I assume he was hard at work trying to locate some WOV funds to deposit against the check his mouth wrote.
link to original post
(aggressively trimmed)
That is not the conclusion I reach.
Quote: darkoz
There was a gambler who claimed to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year
Eventually that claim was debunked.
MDawg doesn't get it. Apparently never will.
link to original post
Quote: Mdawg
Where did I (or anyone else) claim to beat Baccarat every day of every week of every year?
Where was this claim "to beat Baccarat every day of every week of every year" debunked.
I challenge
darkoz submitted his evidence via PM, which was this post of Feb 3, 2021.
In the view of this judge, both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob. Given the context of the darkoz post and going by a "preponderance of the evidence" standard, I do not believe darkoz was referring to those posts at the time of his post and was instead misquoting MDawg.
My judgement is in favor of the complainant. darkoz is sentenced to a seven-day suspension for false quoting.
Quote: WizardIn the view of this judge, both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob.
link to original post
Was it my claim that I can jump a tall building in a single bound? Was it my claim that I was a state fair pie eating champion 4 years in a row? Was it my claim that at the time I had over 20 cats? If it wasn't one of those than I'm baffled, what could I have been claiming to elicit a sarcastic remark from DO. (this is all tomfoolery on my part of course I know what I was claiming but we won't go there}
Quote: MDawgI assume he was hard at work trying to locate some WOV funds to deposit against the check his mouth wrote.
link to original post
Although I will go out on a limb and opine that this post of REDietz from 2021, was nowhere near DarkOz's mind when he made his original post the subject of this Coach's Challenge, I have to hand it to him that he was able to find such an obscure post even though it so obviously didn't fit the bill, even if it did take him a while to find it.
REDietz was actually suspended more than once for posting such satires, and even acknowledged that what he wrote was not meant to be taken seriously when he added, just a couple of posts after the one DarkOz quoted, "Shoot, I thought EvenBob was being facetious this whole time."
Just out of respect for how hard he tried to beat this one, even making a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds before going to trial, I will self suspend for 24 hours under penalty of that if I so much as login to WOV in the next 24 hours I volunteer for a six day vacation alongside him.
As I suspected.Quote: WizardQuote: darkoz
There was a gambler who claimed to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year
Eventually that claim was debunked.
MDawg doesn't get it. Apparently never will.
link to original postQuote: Mdawg
Where did I (or anyone else) claim to beat Baccarat every day of every week of every year?
Where was this claim "to beat Baccarat every day of every week of every year" debunked.
I challenge
darkoz submitted his evidence via PM, which was this post of Feb 3, 2021.
In the view of this judge, both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob. Given the context of the darkoz post and going by a "preponderance of the evidence" standard, I do not believe darkoz was referring to those posts at the time of his post and was instead misquoting MDawg.
My judgement is in favor of the complainant. darkoz is sentenced to a seven-day suspension for false quoting.
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolf
January 4, 2024 4:35 pm
Or will Mike find it to be a technicality situation and say he was reading between the lines and he believes you to have been talking about MD.
Quote: MDawg
Where did I (or anyone else) claim to beat Baccarat every day of every week of every year?
youtube and twitter
Or are you just
with this.
It was a PM.Quote: MDawgI see no record of that post A.Wolf claims he made on January 4, 2024 4:35pm. A post that purports to prognosticate the outcome of this matter. Time for another Coach's Challenge? for misquoting yourself. 😁
link to original post
]Quote: MDawgDo you want to take on this Challenge with me and include youtube and twitter in the universe of acceptable subsets?
Or are you just
with this.
link to original post
If you really are interested in seeing some people making absurd claims, there is a lot of stuff out there. It is fascinating that you ask in such a weird way. Here is a good place to start, lot of crypto, real estate type things, and some videos about casino games: https://www.youtube.com/@SpencerCornelia
Instagram might actually be the best place with people showing off their stacks of bills, big houses, and expensive cars.
I read about a model who admits she "augments" her appearance with AI, has not uncloaked herself, who rakes in money somehow or other maybe via OnlyFans. And then there is another model I read about who is entirely AI, quite popular. I'd think, why bother to even look at the unending parade of busty IG models if you can't even know or tell which one is real.
AI augmentation goes beyond airbrushing I assume.
There are a few girls I know in person from IG whose faces they have softened and smoothed out so that when you meet them in person, quite a difference, but the ones I know their bodies were exactly what was depicted. When it gets to the point that even the bodies are altered especially greatly, that's just not even worth looking.
There are people who wouldn't want to be a small fish in a big pond.Quote: TomG]Quote: MDawgDo you want to take on this Challenge with me and include youtube and twitter in the universe of acceptable subsets?
Or are you just
with this.
link to original post
If you really are interested in seeing some people making absurd claims, there is a lot of stuff out there. It is fascinating that you ask in such a weird way. Here is a good place to start, lot of crypto, real estate type things, and some videos about casino games: https://www.youtube.com/@SpencerCornelia
Instagram might actually be the best place with people showing off their stacks of bills, big houses, and expensive cars.
link to original post
didn't watch all of it, just clicked through to some of the time stamps and there was a good sales pitch I liked "I'm going to show you how you can make up to $500 per day, every single day of the week".
The Chris Mitchell guy too, inherently his story doesn't make sense, but with no evidence presented you can't ever know what really happened, or didn't happen. Plus again, he doesn't even claim to play Baccarat every day, he alternates between other table games too. 😃
What these guys remind me of are the hustlers who float into high limit salons, sit down with some money (some don't even pretend they have money just stand behind the players babbling Bank! Player! at key moments) and then try to ingratiate themselves as some kind of coach, asking for a cut at the end of the session. That's another advantage of playing at private tables - any who walk up stick out so obviously, that it is easy to ask for them to be removed if they start trying to hustle in any way.
Quote: Wizarddarkoz submitted his evidence via PM, which was this post of Feb 3, 2021.
In the view of this judge, both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob. Given the context of the darkoz post and going by a "preponderance of the evidence" standard, I do not believe darkoz was referring to those posts at the time of his post and was instead misquoting MDawg.
My judgement is in favor of the complainant. darkoz is sentenced to a seven-day suspension for false quoting.
link to original post
I'm not the judge here, but as far as I may determine, you could have just as easily been convicted on "both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob" (i.e. that they didn't fit the bill of whatever you were trying to claim whatsoever), as well as "Given the context of the darkoz post and going by a 'preponderance of the evidence' standard, I do not believe darkoz was referring to those posts at the time of his post and was instead misquoting MDawg."
You may not introduce new facts on appeal, only matters of law may be adjudicated. And the fact of the matter is, you came up with some irrelevant comic post from REDietz that had nothing to do with whatever you were claiming and was not on your mind when you made that original post.
In any case, this "appeal" takes "blowing off some steam after serving a WOV sentence" to a new level.
I did self suspend for 24 hours last weekend to show respect for how hard you tried to beat this one, but let's not take it to the Theatre of the Absurd.
Quote: billryanDon't write a check that you can't cover. You said something. It was obvious who you were referring to. Back it up or accept the consequences. I'm not sure why that is difficult.
link to original post
Quote: MDawgIn re: COACH CHALLENGE RULING APPEAL
Quote: Wizarddarkoz submitted his evidence via PM, which was this post of Feb 3, 2021.
In the view of this judge, both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob. Given the context of the darkoz post and going by a "preponderance of the evidence" standard, I do not believe darkoz was referring to those posts at the time of his post and was instead misquoting MDawg.
My judgement is in favor of the complainant. darkoz is sentenced to a seven-day suspension for false quoting.
link to original post
I'm not the judge here, but as far as I may determine, you could have just as easily been convicted on "both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob" (i.e. that they didn't fit the bill of whatever you were trying to claim whatsoever), as well as "Given the context of the darkoz post and going by a 'preponderance of the evidence' standard, I do not believe darkoz was referring to those posts at the time of his post and was instead misquoting MDawg."
You may not introduce new facts on appeal, only matters of law may be adjudicated. And the fact of the matter is, you came up with some irrelevant comic post from REDietz that had nothing to do with whatever you were claiming and was not on your mind when you made that original post.
In any case, this "appeal" takes "blowing off some steam after serving a WOV sentence" to a new level.
I did self suspend for 24 hours last weekend to show respect for how hard you tried to beat this one, but let's not take it to the Theatre of the Absurd.
link to original post
My appeal is completely a matter of law and not new facts.
Furthermore this isn't a traditional court of law or there would not have been any coach challenge.
Written rules (forum rules for example) were twisted. Any judge who stated the law doesn't mention XYZ but he is going to twist them because he has standing to do so would be automatic grounds for appeal in the real world.
Furthermore no contract that is unequivocal in the nature of a coach challenge where one side is enforced to participate while the other makes all the rules would be a valid agreement in the real world anyway.
And furthermore as you well know in the real world a defendants attorney has the chance to make precisely a set of claims that will be intended as brought up for possible appeal, these claims made as part of the public record at the conclusion of the case. No such aspect is allowed on WOV where banishment is immediately assigned robbing one of that very action so please don't compare this to official court proceedings
In addition you don't even profess to claim I failed the challenge but again that the separate issue of a misquote is the issue.
You failed to write this aspect into your challenge while being solely responsible for writing it. Admit you lost and accept punishment if and when it comes
Quote: MDawgYesterday, I even offered him the opportunity to withdraw the claim and admit he made it up, and he just laughed.
link to original post
Quote: darkozMan I just busted a gut laughing at that.
(Waiting for coaches challenge that I show hospital records of my damaged inner organs)
link to original post
Quote: MDawgWell, You ain't talkin' so bad now, ese.
link to original post
Quote: darkozaccept punishment if and when it comes
link to original post
D.Oz, how CONFIDENT are you on the outcome of your appeal?
Care to make a wager against the outcome? Something along the lines of that if you win your appeal, I self suspend for a certain period of time. If you lose your appeal, you self suspend for a certain period of time. "Self suspend" defined as no logins whatsoever to the forum.
Quote: MDawgQuote: darkozaccept punishment if and when it comes
link to original post
D.Oz, how CONFIDENT are you on the outcome of your appeal?
Care to make a wager against the outcome? Something along the lines of that if you win your appeal, I self suspend for a certain period of time. If you lose your appeal, you self suspend for a certain period of time. "Self suspend" defined as no logins whatsoever to the forum.
link to original post
I am 100% confident my appeal is sound.
That said I am not 100% confident the final ruling will be sound.
Wager denied.
I would be willing to wager that if there are 3 unbiased judges that they would say that DO should've won the coaches challenge.Quote: MDawgQuote: darkozaccept punishment if and when it comes
link to original post
D.Oz, how CONFIDENT are you on the outcome of your appeal?
Care to make a wager against the outcome? Something along the lines of that if you win your appeal, I self suspend for a certain period of time. If you lose your appeal, you self suspend for a certain period of time. "Self suspend" defined as no logins whatsoever to the forum.
link to original post
general approach to matters.
Quote: MDawgIn re: COACH CHALLENGE RULING APPEAL
DarkOz could have just as easily been convicted on "both those posts were sarcastic in nature in response to claims by EvenBob" (i.e. that they didn't fit the bill of whatever you were trying to claim whatsoever), as well as "Given the context of the darkoz post and going by a 'preponderance of the evidence' standard, I do not believe darkoz was referring to those posts at the time of his post and was instead misquoting MDawg."
link to original post
Here's why:
This is the challenged post:
Quote: darkozThere was a gambler who claimed to beat baccarat every day of every week of every year
Eventually that claim was debunked.
MDawg doesn't get it. Apparently never will.
link to original post
The elements of DarkOz's claim are
(1) There was a gambler who claimed to beat baccarat
(2) every day of every week of every year
3) whose claim was eventually debunked
The post DarkOz offered to support what he claimed from REDietz was as follows (and REDietz also quoted a post from JoeMan too, so let's just include the JoeMan post too in what the Wizard considered when he wrote
):Quote: Wizardboth those posts were sarcastic in nature
link to original post
Quote: redietzQuote: JoemanI have been going to casinos for almost 30 years, and I have yet to have a single losing baccarat session! ;)
I got you beat by a mile. I spent a hundred days each year in casinos for decades, and have been going to casinos since the early 80's. I have yet to lose a single session to the casinos in all that time.
Some people say I don't play enough to have reached "the long term." Hogwash! I'm sitting at the baccarat tables every night, especially between 2 AM and 4 AM. I do have a system, though.
I only sit at those tables that are closed. The casinos say it's okay as long as I pay them an hourly rate and bring my own chips. One drawback -- they are a little tight on my comps.
link to original post
1) The Joeman post fails to fit the bill, because it refers to that he has been going to casinos for 30 years (not every day of every week of every year),
2) and he winds it up with a wink ; that further emphasizes that the post was not meant to be taken seriously.
3) The post was not debunked, was not even taken seriously, no one even commented on it, other than REDietz, who took the satire further, with HIS post ("I got you beat by a mile").
1) The REDietz post fails to fit the bill, because it refers to having "spent a hundred days each year in casinos" - which again does not translate to every day of every week of every year,
2) and is clearly meant in jest because he states that "I only sit at those tables that are closed" meaning that he doesn't even play, just sits there pretending to play.
3) This satirical, joking post too, was never debunked, because it was never meant to be taken seriously.
DarkOz, your evidence provided was nothing short of a joke, really bad, you had no prayer of getting out of this one offering that off the wall nonsense, and I repeat:
Quote: mdawgyou came up with some irrelevant comic post from REDietz that had nothing to do with whatever you were claiming and was not on your mind when you made that original post.
link to original post
