Al 'The Professor' Kaufman: 3 Questions

an introduction
Al 'The Professor' Kaufman

"I'm the best (gambler) there is"

"I have what everybody wants. How to win in the casinos"

also: stop losing at the casinos


Now from the video collection on YouTube (yeah! now has transcriptions)
Blackjack system


Q: what are the odds of him sitting down (at a Blackjack table)
the first second he gets there losing 8 in a row?
Answer Al: It's virtually impossible.

Professor Al also says this:
11:05
Now remember it's possible to lose 8 hands in a row
it doesn't happen that often
But you have to be there when it happens
and remember we are cutting down the odds
because it has to happen the second you get to the table

Question #1: agree with The Professor?
Question #2: what are the odds of him sitting down (at a Blackjack table)
the first second he gets there losing 8 (bets) in a row?
and are they different playing at one table or over ten tables?

more (that do not want to watch the video)
0:24
"Hi
I'm Al "The Gambling Professor"
I reside here in Las Vegas because I gamble for a living.

I'm probably the best there is.
and I'm going to make you a winner in the casino today
IF you listen to my rules."

He is a Method Gambler.

From the video:
"We are looking to earn money.
you need horrific bad luck to lose"

2:44 has the BJ Basic Strategy chart
BJ bankroll $2380
starting bet $5
goal is to win 1 hand, before losing 8 in a row,
10 times for about $100 earned winnings.
after the first win, move on to another table.

No splitting, never double downs.
Play 10 tables you stop
repeat this 5 times a day

Progression after each loss go to the next level.
on a win start back at $5
5,15,35,75,150,300,600,1200
works for Craps too!

19:00
but what are the odds of him sitting down
the first second he gets there losing 8 in a row?
It's virtually impossible.

at 20:40
Dealer misplays his hand.
a J showing. did not peek for an Ace and hit players hand with a 9
That 9 belongs in the very next hand.
That next hand would have pushed instead of a win.

22:10
"Most of the time you are going to win between the 2nd and 3rd hand."
Sally says
This statement is also an error. Everyone should know the player wins about 47% of the hands (not counting pushes)
right after the last win. (the relative frequency from a frequency table)
To win on the 2nd or 3rd hand is only about 38% chance
It is about 72% of hands won happen on the 1st and the 2nd hand played
in the video, 15 hands did just that for a 75% hit rate.
Just watching the two tables played in the video, the player won 12 out of 20 hands on the very first hand, that is 60% for this small sample size.

Back to Al
"This is a piece of cake.
You can make a living.
You can make $500 a day with a $2380 bankroll"


Looks like The Professor shows no math but speaks of it and his experiences gambling.
Question #3: Is it time for the Wizard to meet The Professor?

Sally

Questions are again

Question #1: agree with The Professor?

Question #2: what are the odds of him sitting down (at a Blackjack table)
the first second he gets there losing 8 (bets) in a row?

Question #3: Is it time for the Wizard to meet The Professor?

Quote: mustangsally

Questions are again

Question #1: agree with The Professor?

Question #2: what are the odds of him sitting down (at a Blackjack table)
the first second he gets there losing 8 (bets) in a row?

Question #3: Is it time for the Wizard to meet The Professor?

I don't know the answer to #2, but the answer to #1 is hell no, and #3 would be hilarious but not worth the Wizard's time.

Bonus Question #4: is this guy just another asshat systems seller who happens to look more professional?
DING DING DING

What tickles my pickle is (if the background is found to be authentic) he films inside a convention space of some or the other casino.

Did he get permission to film such a spot inside a casino? What casino would give a charletan such as this the opportunity to sell his wares using a casino facility?

Why does he not quote the actual math involved? If someone asks you what the odds are of losing 8 hands in a row, should you not be able to present that in a factual way for everyone to understand?

I must admit I didn't watch the video and I have absolutely NO intention of doing so either. This dude is high off his ass is my final summation.

Thanks

deleted

Do we even know if this fella is still living? The video appears quite old. Cars were driving down Fremont Street between The Fremont, The Mint And Golden Nugget. Before my time in Vegas, but Wikipedia says the Mint closed in 88, about the time I was heading off to kindergarden. :-)

He put this up as of 3 months ago

Craps lesson

Seems to be part of the same family as the video that the OP put up.

He has another one where he bet the pass/don't pass a the same time using the same chart as he had for BJ.

If you table hop like that guy says, wouldn't you get backed off quick? Maybe this guy got put in the black book or something and now that's why he is putting up all his old vids to get some new money coming in.

except most $5 table limits are $500? i have not been to that many diff casinos so just from what i have seen..

i have done this progression on craps after 1 pass made and have bust at $300 ;) (so 7 made mostly naturals).

Quote: Perdition

He put this up as of 3 months ago

Craps lesson

Seems to be part of the same family as the video that the OP put up.

He has another one where he bet the pass/don't pass a the same time using the same chart as he had for BJ.

If you table hop like that guy says, wouldn't you get backed off quick? Maybe this guy got put in the black book or something and now that's why he is putting up all his old vids to get some new money coming in.

Any casino would welcome this guy's action. Unless the "secret sauce" in his system is actually cheating (capping/pinching etc.), he would be a gold mine for the casinos and they would be stupid to back him off.

There's an old quote...something about casinos sending a limo to the airport for anyone with a "system."

deleted

Quote: mustangsally

Questions are again

Question #1: agree with The Professor?

Question #2: what are the odds of him sitting down (at a Blackjack table)
the first second he gets there losing 8 (bets) in a row?

Question #3: Is it time for the Wizard to meet The Professor?

Question 1: I agree that The Professor is a clown.

His system is just a four-step +1 Grand Martingale that fades into a regular Martingale on the fifth step. The aspect of that system that really confuses me is, "Why not just continue to double and add one base unit?" You're already down that amount of money on a system base of $5 in the first place, you're already risking (up to) $2,380, so why not continue to increase the unit and risk a little more?

Question 2: According to the Wizard:

https://wizardofodds.com/ask-the-wizard/blackjack/probability/

The probability of a win, discluding pushes, is .4636 which makes the probability of a loss .5364.

Those probabilities aren't going to be exactly right because Professor Clown refuses to double or split hands. The refusal to split is going to increase his overall probability of losing a hand, while the refusal to double is actually going to INCREASE his probability of winning a hand in many situations. For example, if you hit a 9 or 10 against a dealer showing 8, then many of those hits are going to result in a total less than seventeen, in which event, BS would then suggest that the player take another hit. The EV of NOT doubling will be worse, but the actual win rate will be better.

I'm just not sure how this offsets, so I'm going to use the Wizard's numbers assuming proper Basic Strategy.

The overall probability of losing eight in a row (assuming proper BS): (.5364)^8 = 0.00685346427756715 = 1/0.00685346427756715 = 1 in 145.912

AND:

This is a very rough approximation of what will happen:

Step 1: WIN (Wins $5) = .4636 * 5 = 2.318

Step 2: LOSS/WIN (Wins $10) = (.5364 * .4636) * 10 = 2.4867504

Step 3: LOSS/LOSS/WIN (Wins $15) = (.5364 * .5364 * .4636) * 15 = 2.0008393718399997

Step 4: LOSS/LOSS/LOSS/WIN (Wins $20) = ((.5364)^3 * .4636) * 20 = 1.431000318739968

Step 5-8 (Step 8 WIN): (All will win $20)

((.5364)^4 * .4636) * 20 = 0.7675885709721187

((.5364)^5 * .4636) * 20 = 0.41173450946944445

((.5364)^6 * .4636) * 20 = 0.22085439087941003

((.5364)^7 * .4636) * 20 = 0.11846629526771554

STEP 8 LOSS:

(.5364)^8 * (-2380) = -16.311244980609817

OVERALL ER: 2.318 + 2.4867504 + 2.0008393718399997 + 1.431000318739968 + 0.7675885709721187 + 0.41173450946944445 + 0.22085439087941003 + 0.11846629526771554 -16.311244980609817 = -6.556011123441159

Do I want to determine the average total bet?

Not really, but I guess I will.

(.4636 * 5) = 2.318

(.5364 * .4636) * 20 = 4.9735008

(.5364 * .5364 * .4636) * 55 = 7.336411030079999

((.5364)^3 * .4636) * 130 = 9.301502071809793

((.5364)^4 * .4636) * 280 = 10.746239993609663

((.5364)^5 * .4636) * 580 = 11.94030077461389

((.5364)^6 * .4636) * 1180 = 13.030409061885192

(WIN OR LOSE) (.5364)^7 * 2380 = 30.408734117467965

2.318 + 4.9735008 + 7.336411030079999 + 9.301502071809793 + 10.746239993609663 + 11.94030077481389 + 13.030409061885192 + 30.408734117467965 = 90.05509784966651

***DISCLAIMER***

-The effects of not splitting or doubling are reasonably well-incorporated into the Expected Loss because the Win/Loss rate accounts for perfect Basic Strategy, but perfect Basic Strategy would alter the bet amounts at each level (as the possibility of a Split or Double would necessarily increase the average bet amount, per level) so I think my formula approximates not splitting/doubling well-enough for the analysis of what will be a losing system anyway.

-The second disclaimer is that I did not include the possibility of being dealt a winning Natural into the calculations. While this results in inexact numbers with respect to the Expected Loss value (though it does not change the average bet) there's no indication that The Professor's method relies upon the player being dealt a Natural in any way to work, and in most cases, the player will either win or lose eight in a row without a Natural being involved at all.

-If anyone wants to figure out the Expected Loss of each run of the system factoring in Naturals, (I don't) then determine the probability of a winning Natural and subtract same from the overall probability of winning. Multiply the amount to be won (per level) by the overall probability of winning by any means other than a winning Natural and add the result of the amount to be won with a winning Natural multiplied by the probability of a winning Natural.

Sorry, I'm not doing it. Too labor intensive for what is guaranteed to be a losing system (not to mention a horrible way to play) anyway.

QUESTION 3:

No, why should he? The Professor has clearly not visited the Blackjack page of www.wizardofodds.com, or he would not be playing a system in which the player refuses to Double/Split to begin with.

Quote: Perdition

If you table hop like that guy says, wouldn't you get backed off quick? Maybe this guy got put in the black book or something and now that's why he is putting up all his old vids to get some new money coming in.

I don't see why, if I owned a casino and had a player who refused to Split/Double, you could go to a different table for every single hand you play for all I care.

Quote: bahdbwoy

except most $5 table limits are $500? i have not been to that many diff casinos so just from what i have seen..

Table limit spreads are irrelevant, just move to a different table, or casino, if necessary.

Quote: mustangsally

Question #1: agree with The Professor?

Question #2: what are the odds of him sitting down (at a Blackjack table)
the first second he gets there losing 8 (bets) in a row?

Question #3: Is it time for the Wizard to meet The Professor?

#1 To lose 8 hands in a row the minute you get to the table.
It happens.
Maybe The Professor has never seen it.
So he could be being truthful here.

#2 depends on the probability of a BJ loss and that depends on the rules of the game.
it could be around 53% not counting the pushes
This I will leave for another to answer.

This guy is in your face with his many claims.
He claims to be the best.
He teaches players to win, not how to play the games.

#3 Yes, The Wizard should drive over to The Professor's office in Las Vegas and challenge him on his claims

------------------------------------------------
The Craps video is interesting.
both videos shows why many system sellers think they can win with a (their)
system of play and keep winning
and when a loss happens they still come out ahead because of how rare these losing streaks are.

At this guys' website he also mentions a Bible for Craps
(The Zumma Craps System tester book. actual dice rolls with decisions)
at roll #105 the first 8 in a row of losing bets happens
It actually occurred 55 times during those 35,097 actual dice rolls
I show a team net profit of -$33,410

Remember he says the odds are less to lose 8 in a row by moving to another table after 10 to 20 minutes of play on one table.
(both craps and BJ)
another math claim

Here are my notes on this craps video.
I think I will email him and ask him join the discussion about his 8 step losing progression
and how easy it is (the probabilities) of winning
on average 50 progressions per day before losing a bankroll.

what does he have to lose?
"This is the only way you can win"
The Professor
"don't take what I give you
and think you have poetic freedom and go out in the casino and win $10000
If I tell you to win $500 don't look to win $600"
another math claim

"trust me I'm The Professor
Ive unturned every stone and every rock
I've gone over these things 24 hours a day with mathematicians (who? another claim)
I know what I am talking about
I'm here to help you
Please, don't out-think me."

Las Vegas is who's town when it comes to knowledge about gambling?

The Wizard
or
The Professor

Good Luck

Quote: Mission146

Table limit spreads are irrelevant, just move to a different table, or casino, if necessary.

No no no... there's secret magic in the deck and the single deck can't lose 8 in a row!

Quote: 7craps

#1 To lose 8 hands in a row the minute you get to the table.
It happens.
Maybe The Professor has never seen it.
So he could be being truthful here.

He sure hasn't played much Blackjack, then, certainly not enough that he made a career out of winning.

Quote:

#2 depends on the probability of a BJ loss and that depends on the rules of the game.
it could be around 53% not counting the pushes
This I will leave for another to answer.

I kind of did, but not really. Last post on the previous page, I took the Wizard's win/loss rate discluding pushes. The problem is that the system does not Split/Double, not splitting will increase the loss rate while not doubling will increase the win rate. I don't have the means to figure out the overall effect of not splitting/doubling, so I used the Wizard's numbers which assume BS.

I also did not factor in the probability of a winning Natural at each bet level. I am capable of doing that, but it's just too much of a PITA to deal with for something that will be a losing system, anyway.

Quote: Mission146

Question 1: I agree that The Professor is a clown.

I think he does a good Rodney Dangerfield

Quote: Mission146

Question 2: According to the Wizard:

https://wizardofodds.com/ask-the-wizard/blackjack/probability/

The probability of a win, discluding pushes, is .4636 which makes the probability of a loss .5364.

I show a sim of around 47.2% win probability not including ties.
I used the no double-no split with his basic strategy table

I am guessing with a BIG bet (level 7 or 8) and he gets a BJ with a Dealer Ace he will take even money.

Quote: Mission146

No, why should he?

I say yes
The Wizard would not want this guy to go unchallenged.

It is either the Professor or the Wizard.
They both can not be the true gambling expert here.

the Professor says he is the expert and the greatest.
I know I am not the gambling expert

Quote: thecesspit

No no no... there's secret magic in the deck and the single deck can't lose 8 in a row!

The Professor claims his Method wins because he wins only one bet at each table then moves on to the next.

Playing at only single deck in Vegas will get difficult.
El Cortez will ban this play right away.

His big math claim is the odds are lower to lose 8 in a row by winning only one hand per table and moving on
instead of winning more than one hand at each table.

he also claims that you will lose 8 in a row (and a starting bankroll $2380)
eventually but your total wins will be greater than your total losses.
AND I almost forgot, he also mentions in the BJ video you will still earn comps playing his way and that will almost make up for what you do lose!


He shows no proof of any of his claims by any math.

maybe the non-believers with show some proof by math.

many still will believe who they want to
The Wizard or
The Professor

gotta love this

I think that would be interesting. Have this guy put up his own money and play his system in a casino of the Wizard's choosing. This guy has been posting vids and obviously wants his name to get out there to rope people in so he has an incentive to look good for free advertising on this site.

He says all his methods have been backed by math experts so I'm sure he wouldn't mind the Wizard giving him a few challenges right?

Also from the few other challenges I have seen on here, the chance for some kind of betting action to occur here would be another incentive. Although would anyone actually lay money down on that guy?

Seems at least something to have fun with.

The Professor claims 8 losses in a row is an occurrence virtually unseen.

I can and have lost 8 hands in a row before I finish my first beer.

His "method" ignores tables limits as if that really matters.

removed
silly

Sally

Quote: 7craps

I think he does a good Rodney Dangerfield

Yeah, but Rodney Dangerfield actually deserved the respect that he, "Didn't get." The professor does not get it, nor should he.

Quote:

I show a sim of around 47.2% win probability not including ties.
I used the no double-no split with his basic strategy table

I am guessing with a BIG bet (level 7 or 8) and he gets a BJ with a Dealer Ace he will take even money.

I imagine so!

Okay, here we go, eight decks:

Probability of Winning Natural

(32/416 * 108/415 * 2) - ((32/416 * 108/415 * 2) * (31/414 * 107/413 * 2)) = 0.03848365678412469 or .0385

Probabilities

Win, No Natural: .4335

Loss: .528

Win, Natural: .0385

This is a rough approximation of what will happen:

Eight Losses Probability: (.528)^8 = 0.006040479020157646 = 1/0.006040479020157646 = 1 in 165.55

Eight Losses: (.528)^8 * (-$2380) = -14.376340067975197

Hand 1: (.4335 * 5) + (.0385 * 7.5) = 2.45625

Hand 2: (0.528 * .4335 * 10) + (0.528 * .0385 * 17.50) = 2.64462

Hand 3: (0.27878400000000003 * .4335 * 15) + (0.27878400000000003 * .0385 * 32.50) = 2.1616214400000002

Hand 4: (0.14719795200000002 * .4335 * 20) + (0.14719795200000002 * .0385 * 67.50) = 1.6587369216

Hand 5: (0.07772051865600002 * .4335 * 20) + (0.07772051865600002 * .0385 * 95) = 0.9580996937318402

Hand 6: (0.04103643385036801 * .4335 * 20) + (0.04103643385036801 * .0385 * 170) = 0.6243693410333493

Hand 7: (0.02166723707299431 * .4335 * 20) + (0.02166723707299431 * .0385 * 320) = 0.4547953061621506

Hand 8: (0.011440301174540996 * .4335 * 20) + (0.011440301174540996 * .0385 * 620) = 0.37226740021956406

Expected Return (per run): 2.45625 + 2.64462 + 2.1616214400000002 + 1.6587369216 + 0.9580996937318402 + 0.6243693410333493 + 0.4547953061621506 + 0.37226740021956406 - 14.376340067975197 = -3.045579965228292

Average Total Bet

(.472 * 5) = 2.36

(.528 * .472 * 20) = 4.98432

(0.27878400000000003 * .472 * 55) = 7.23723264

(0.14719795200000002 * .472 * 130) = 9.03206633472

(0.07772051865600002 * .472 * 280) = 10.271543745576961

(0.04103643385036801 * .472 * 580) = 11.234134130876745

(0.02166723707299431 * .472 * 1180) = 12.067784360174911

(0.011440301174540996 * 2380) = 27.22791679540757

2.36 + 4.98432 + 7.23723264 + 9.03206633472 + 10.271543745576961 + 11.234134130876745 + 12.067784360174911 + 27.22791679540757 = 84.41499800675619

Effective House Edge

3.045579965228292/84.41499800675619 = 0.036078659446092 or 3.61%

3.61%!!?? The House Edge for Blackjack shouldn't be that high, should it?

That's right, I forgot, no doubling, splitting, surrendering....

Sounds like a system that ABSOLUTELY SUCKS to me.

Do you think, "The Perfesser," knows enough to play Blackjack pays 3:2 as opposed to 6:5?

Gambling columnist and author Henry Tamburin said, "Oh, God." That was at Fitzgeralds in Tunica when I lost 22 hands in a row. Luckily some of those hands were for minimum bets but some were in high counts.

I also played the traditional Martingale in my early career (like first couple of trips to AC) and kicked their asses, until you know what happened. Those "odd," "rarely happens" events seem to occur a lot more the more you play in the casinos.

Quote: FrankScoblete

Gambling columnist and author Henry Tamburin said, "Oh, God." That was at Fitzgeralds in Tunica when I lost 22 hands in a row. Luckily some of those hands were for minimum bets but some were in high counts.

I also played the traditional Martingale in my early career (like first couple of trips to AC) and kicked their asses, until you know what happened. Those "odd," "rarely happens" events seem to occur a lot more the more you play in the casinos.

The best part is that, "The Professor," created a system that sucks so bad that he made it worse than a few different Even Money games that should be worse than Blackjack. Here are a few examples:

Craps (Pass Line, No Odds):

Probability of Failure: (.5071)^8 = 0.004372691964056838 = 1/0.004372691964056838 = 1 in 228.7

HE = 1.41%

Single Zero Roulette (No Imprisonment Rule):

Probability of Failure: (0.5135135135135135)^8 = 0.004835206373105229 = 1/0.004835206373105229 = 1 in 206.8

HE: 2.70%

Baccarat-Player:

(0.50682483)^8 = 0.004353745785087052 = 1/0.004353745785087052 = 1 in 229.69

HE: 1.2351%

Casino War would be better from a standpoint of HE, even though that's not always an Even-Money bet, because you bet double when going to war.

It's just a really terrible system, gives Blackjack a Carnival-Like House Edge!

deleted

Quote: mustangsally

Okay
now I do have to agree after listening to the Blackjack video again, would be nice if there was a transcript of it,

Very difficult to listen to his videos IMO.

Google tries
The transcription will just give The Gambling Professor more material for his act
It is fun to watch and read his video on YouTube using closed caption
Google makes it more entertaining


added another video for entertainment
only $500 for a 1 to 1.5 hour session with money back guarantee
This transcript is good too.

Quote: Mission146

The best part is that, "The Professor," created a system that sucks so bad

Not really. Depends on how one looks at it.

He must (in his mind) do that in order to turn $2380 into $2880.
$500 a day job with risk of a *no pay day - lose bankroll day* quite high
Maybe $200 is easier to win? yes it is. (88.3%)

for each win it gets easier to win those 50 one-win-move-on-tables in a row

Just betting the even money bets at 00 Roulette has a higher probability of making $500 a day using Bold Play
than playing his progression at BJ
(betting just enough to hit your bankroll target or everything to get back in it)

1st bet: $500 win (18/38 - about the same as BJ)
same bet tomorrow, lose go to second bet (1880 remains)
2nd bet: $1,000 (lose this - chance of losing two bets in a row only 27.7%, about 1 in 4)
3rd bet: all the rest $880 to have more chips
win and make 4th bet (lose and start tomorrow with another bankroll)
4th bet: $1,120
and so on
this works out to
[1] 79.85906%
instead of 76.26% playing BJ

Maybe $200 is easier to win?
[1] 90.47004%
yep
I be very happy with just $100 a day

too much math here
why give this guy so much free math?
more comedy material
(bullets for his gun)