The Adventures of MDawg

Quote: MDawg

Hi MarcusClark. It was before my time, but here is one of the threads from this guy. Let's call this guy #1.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/trip-reports/20707-pre-trip-asian-new-year-feb-18th-to-23rd/
I don't know for a fact that whatever he posted was proven to be false, but that is what AxelWolf says.

Then again, AxelWolf also claims that whatever was said in this thread - let's call this guy #2
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/big-wins/19626-went-for-it/
is also false, and yet it was verified by the Wizard himself, and AxelWolf never explained why he thought it was false. In that case I understand the guy #2 deleted the initial post because too many crazies were contacting him after he posted about the big win.

In short, AxelWolf has a history of calling people liars, and at least with reference to the claims of the guy #2 in that second thread, I have not seen any reasoning behind AxelWolf's cavil even though I have asked AxelWolf more than once to state why he believes that second guy #2's claims were false, and the best AxelWolf has offered is that he "can't remember" why he believes that. I have no idea what happened with the first guy #1, but as another member here put it,


Put another way:

I read the majority of the threads and I've seen some related posted by the same members. It seems anything that has the sense of reality where there's a great amount of detail posted with pictures or without pictures, Axel will attempt to prove the people either a sock puppet or straight out lying.

I personally cannot see where person number one or person number two are outright lying or pretending to be someone else. Looks factual to me. But I might be wrong?

Quote: Marcusclark66

I personally cannot see where person number one or person number two are outright lying or pretending to be someone else. Looks factual to me. But I might be wrong?

If someone claims that they can walk to the moon, then posts a lot of other extraneous photos and accounts, there's very good reason to suspect all that stuff is fake as well.

Quote: Marcusclark66

I personally cannot see where person number one or person number two are outright lying or pretending to be someone else. Looks factual to me. But I might be wrong?

Of COURSE YOU ARE WRONG. And you are anything but objective.

Not long ago on another forum, MDawg was obsessing about the view for this forum. He kept linking to another site that tracks views and traffic and kept obsessing about how when he posts here, views and traffic are up vs when he is not posting. THAT right there tells you what his agenda is. He is a fiction writer seeking attention.

Quote: kewlj

Of COURSE YOU ARE WRONG. And you are anything but objective.

Not long ago on another forum, MDawg was obsessing about the view for this forum. He kept linking to another site that tracks views and traffic and kept obsessing about how when he posts here, views and traffic are up vs when he is not posting. THAT right there tells you what his agenda is. He is a fiction writer seeking attention.

I thought it was against the rules and regulations of this forum and the Wizards rules. You're not allowed to speak about other forums postings such as you did? Correct me if I'm wrong I would like to know what the correct protocol is talking about activity thats being posted on other forums, on this forum.

Quote: Marcusclark66

I thought it was against the rules and regulations of this forum and the Wizards rules. You're not allowed to speak about other forums postings such as you did? Correct me if I'm wrong I would like to know what the correct protocol is talking about activity thats being posted on other forums, on this forum.

I am not aware of that. If it is I guess I will be suspended. But that would not change the fact that what I said is fact. You/MDawg/Wynnpleasure are a troll, playing games, misleading players including members of this forum and I suspect just trying to ruin this forum.

Quote: sabre

No you aren't.

Personal insult -- Per the Martingale policy, seven days.

Since MDawg disputes the truthfulness of your claim, it could be interpreted that you are calling him a liar. If you can provide evidence that your statement is true, I will refund the time served.

Quote: Wizard

Personal insult -- Per the Martingale policy, seven days.

Since MDawg disputes the truthfulness of your claim, it could be interpreted that you are calling him a liar. If you can provide evidence that your statement is true, I will refund the time served.

Wizard,

Are you saying you believe it's possible that MDawg wins 99% of the time at Baccarat without any Advantage play?

You have emphatically stated no system can put even a dent in the house edge.

Almost certainly playing without any system would (because the house edge is so powerful) have the same result.

Therefore your own words (that no system or non-advantage play can put a dent in the house edge) make the case that MDawg is lying

Why does one have to put a dent in the House Edge if he wins? Why does one have to be lying if he wins? Why does one have to have an advantage play or systematic play to win? If one is winning why can't one post on this forum and talk about everything else except how he wins, just maybe the person doesn't want to expose how he wins? How come you have to drag in an admission from the person as to how they win or classify them as a liar if it can't be answered your satisfaction? There's a few more but let's start with those.

Okay just a few things. OF COURSE Kewlj thinks I can't win in a casino. (He claims I write "fiction." Isn't that what Kewlj is saying, that I am lying, that I could not possibly be winning?) I would like him to retract that statement - he should not accuse me of lying. I am not lying I speak the truth about everything here, right down to the minutest details and the numbers, and I am, as you know, willing to wager $50,000. (or more) here and now to back up that my details and numbers from this trip are accurate.
In any case, keep in mind - the reason I say "Of Course" - is because We’re talking about a Kewlj who has stated that he couldn’t even win consistently at blackjack this year. When I played only blackjack I won so much and so consistently that I was banned from blackjack. This guy Kewlj hid his identity and didn’t get banned and STILL couldn’t win, correct? What I will give him is he was man enough to come in and admit that his play was resulting in a net loss i.e. that he couldn’t hack it. Well, mainline gambling isn’t for everyone. Most people are just tossing chips around no wonder most lose. So, it perhaps rather makes sense that if KewlJ couldn't even win at blackjack this year - of course - he'd think that I can't win in a casino. But that's not fact, that's just some kind of assumption he is making.

As far as today, I won $18,000. One of my better sessions this trip. I played one shoe, cut by the pit boss before I got there, and netted 3500. Would you believe I was getting ready to call it a day? Then I cut my OWN shoe and not so far into the shoe I started practically screaming - bank goes one, ALWAYS back to player. I mean it was unbelievable, NO deviation, to the VERY end. The dealer kept saying put ten thousand. The pit boss was cheering, All In player! I ended up putting just 1800 on each such hand PLUS another hundred on the side for dealers, and we won Every. Single. Hand. I mean it was one of the crazier things I had ever seen. Better than a run. I've had shoes where it won't go past two, I've had runs, I've had chops, but this "bank goes one, always back to player" was something else. I really had a good time. Looking back I could have emptied the tray, but, that's not my goal (although today, I wish it had been). Still, eighteen grand in one quick session is nothing to scoff at.

Check it out people - I am now ahead over seventy thousand dollars. At the end of the year I will once again post actual live video from the casinos player accounts portals to corroborate everything, and when I get home I will update the TruePassage forum to include all the play from this third resort.

And my Wager still stands - with the revision that I now attest that I have won over seventy thousand dollars this trip between the three resorts.

Quote: Marcusclark66

Why does one have to put a dent in the House Edge if he wins? Why does one have to be lying if he wins? Why does one have to have an advantage play or systematic play to win? If one is winning why can't one post on this forum and talk about everything else except how he wins, just maybe the person doesn't want to expose how he wins? How come you have to drag in an admission from the person as to how they win or classify them as a liar if it can't be answered your satisfaction? There's a few more but let's start with those.

I think if you want an answer to those questions the best person to answer is the Wiz.

Quote: darkoz

If no one takes you up on your scam/con will you give up and go away?

Personal insult. Three-day suspension.

Quote: kewlj

Not long ago on another forum, MDawg was obsessing about the view for this forum. He kept linking to another site that tracks views and traffic and kept obsessing about how when he posts here, views and traffic are up vs when he is not posting. THAT right there tells you what his agenda is. He is a fiction writer seeking attention.

Cross-forum quoting, personal insult. Three-day suspension.

Quote: Wizard

Personal insult -- Per the Martingale policy, seven days.

Since MDawg disputes the truthfulness of your claim, it could be interpreted that you are calling him a liar. If you can provide evidence that your statement is true, I will refund the time served.

Well, allow me to have some fun here. I have some experience with Rob Singer, who is famously precise with what he posts in terms of not really outright lying. I also have done some paranormal debunking in my time, and have some experience with what gets said and what does not. I have been trained in technical writing, and my degree is in writing, so I may be able to come at this from angles most folks do not take.

The MDawg stuff is great fun.

Okay, first of all, let's go back to MDawg's exact original quote which led to the suspension. MDawg said he was both a "short term and lifetime winner at casinos." As per usual, let's examine what MDawg did not say. He did not say that he was ahead money-wise "at casinos." He said he was a "winner." Now, if someone were to take these quotes to court and try to pin MDawg down, he could retreat to the many and varied definitions of the word "winner" since he did not specify being monetarily ahead. Charlie Sheen famously referred to himself as "Winning" for example. Just because MDawg said "at casinos" does not mean that he is clearly stating that he is monetarily ahead actually wagering in casinos. It just means that when "at casinos" MDawg is a winner. He could be a winner in the same sense that Charlie Sheen is a winner.

Now all of this seems abstract and silly, but technically and legally MDawg did not state that he is ahead monetarily "at casinos."

And then we come to the odd construction used in the sentence -- the "at casinos." It has been my experience, and I think most law enforcement professionals will back me up on this, that people do not like to blatantly lie in print. So they find themselves occasionally using odd constructions that are strangely indirect. Winning short term and lifetime "at casinos" is one of those odd constructions. MDawg is a good writer, and that kind of phrase stands out as unnecessarily clumsy.

And this reminds me of how Uri Geller sued and sued and sued the late James Randi. As long as Geller maintained the facade that he believed what he said, anything thrown in his direction was libelous or slanderous and litigious.

Or, on this forum, the suspension-worthy crime of calling someone a "liar."

So, I guess the question is, had the suspendee simply said that MDawg is delusional or mentally disturbed, would those comments have been okay?

Inquiring minds want to know....

Quote: redietz

let's examine what MDawg did not say. He did not say that he was ahead money-wise "at casinos." He said he was a "winner."

Can you clear this up MD, so to render the rest of dietz's diatribe moot?

It's hard to understand what Dietz is trying to say. Perhaps he is trying to insult me in an obfuscatory manner. I'd rather not encourage him to post again. Didn't he create his own thread?

In any case, I have won over $70,000. this trip. I am ahead over $70,000. I have over $70,000. more in cash and chips that all belong to me free and clear than I had at the beginning of this trip. Need I say it again in some other way?

Everything - RFB - has been comp'ed to date. Just waiting to see if recent spa charges will be comp'ed as well. I won a lot today, but I won it quickly, and didn't really put in so many hours of play past few days as I didn't need to, hence the possibility that some spa might not be comp'ed. All the spa charges from earlier portions of the trip WERE comp'ed.

And when someone says that he is a lifetime casino winner it is understood this means in terms of money - winnings. Anyone who has anything to do with gaming would know this, c'est evident, so if Dietz truly did not understand this, he might not be involved in gaming or casinos, which would make me wonder what he is doing on this site.

Quote: MDawg

Didn't he create his own thread?

Yes he did.

It got zero replies and no attention to speak of, so he bumped it by replying to it himself, and invoking your name.

Changes are afoot in Vegas:
Gaming establishments, bars, restaurants and other businesses throughout Nevada will be capped at 25% capacity in an attempt to limit the spread of the surging coronavirus, Gov. Steve Sisolak announced Sunday.
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2020/nov/22/sisolak-to-provide-update-on-nevada-coronavirus-re/

As a hotel guest I don't think I'd be denied reentry even if the casino were at capacity at that moment. In any case, we've stuck pretty much to take-out food the entire time we have been here and don't go to bars in that we don't drink. At the tables, I try to avoid other players and prefer to play alone. Will be interesting to see how this plays out this next weekend, but we will not be here will be gone by then. During the week, in general the Strip casinos aren't so busy anyway, so the 25% limit might not have much effect.

I suppose that the restaurants will have to further socially distance patrons, as more tables are kept closed. Reservations only - no walk ins. (And this applies to fast food places too - which doesn't affect much inside casinos, except perhaps...food courts, such as at Venetian.) When it comes to take-out though, isn't this the same as fast food? So why would it be okay to take-out from a regular restaurant without a reservation but a reservation would be required at a fast food joint? unless maybe, now we need a reservation even for take-out?

Quote: redietz

So, I guess the question is, had the suspendee simply said that MDawg is delusional or mentally disturbed, would those comments have been okay?

Those would have garnered a suspension as well.

I personally follow the Uri Geller standard that one must say something they know to be false to be a liar. For example, if I truly believe the moon is made of green cheese and say as such, then I would be entitled to feel insulted if somebody called me a "liar." Same with "delusional" and "mentally disturbed." All one could do is state my claim about the moon is false and preferably state why.

No matter how ridiculous the claim, I must give the benefit of the doubt to the one making it that they believe it.

I've heard the term "pretzel logic" before but never actually saw an example of it.

Quote: billryan

I've heard the term "pretzel logic" before but never actually saw an example of it.

What an insult!

Quote: DeMango

What an insult!

To pretzels or to logic?

Quote: Wizard

Those would have garnered a suspension as well.

I personally follow the Uri Geller standard that one must say something they know to be false to be a liar. For example, if I truly believe the moon is made of green cheese and say as such, then I would be entitled to feel insulted if somebody called me a "liar." Same with "delusional" and "mentally disturbed." All one could do is state my claim about the moon is false and preferably state why.

No matter how ridiculous the claim, I must give the benefit of the doubt to the one making it that they believe it.

FWIW. My opinion differs slightly from Wizard. I think that's allowed, since we are talking about personal interpretations.

If someone says something which I believe to not be true, I would deem it inappropriate to call him a liar.

I would not, however deem it inappropriate to say
"I believe you are mistaken"
"I believe you are wrong"
or even
"you are mistaken"
or
"you are wrong" (which obviously would only be my belief, not an accusation)

Until today, I would not have suspended Sabre based on that test, because I didn't perceive him as calling anyone a liar... unless I was directed to by Wizard or another moderator to suspend him.

However, Wizard has now set the precedent and I will moderate based on that precedent going forward.
This is Wizard's forum: His rules.

It's my opinion that certain members here are posting in such a way as to encourage suspensions. Certain members then go complaining openly or by PM.
In some parts, that is pretty much a definition of trolling.

Just my 2 cents.

Quote: Wizard

Those would have garnered a suspension as well.

I personally follow the Uri Geller standard that one must say something they know to be false to be a liar. For example, if I truly believe the moon is made of green cheese and say as such, then I would be entitled to feel insulted if somebody called me a "liar." Same with "delusional" and "mentally disturbed." All one could do is state my claim about the moon is false and preferably state why.

No matter how ridiculous the claim, I must give the benefit of the doubt to the one making it that they believe it.

You are 100 percent with the application of interpretation with common sense applied, in so many words.

Updates coming. All is well! (Very well.)

Quote: Marcusclark66

Axel guy seems to run his mouth with all sorts of claims all the time LOL.

Personal insult. Per the Martingale, one month.

Update today? Or tomorrow? Would give me something to read while eating my turkey.

At home, unpacking.

Just to give you an idea of how long we were away, these were dropped off at the rate of one every time housekeeping did the suite - and we tried to keep them out except at most, every other day - at the third resort we stayed at.

These, plus sanitary wipes and masks, were dropped off regularly, at all three resorts we stayed at. Anything that entered the suite in the way of a product or consumable, sealed or not, had to be either thrown away or kept by us. Just gives a small idea of some of the extra expenses these resorts are facing during this coronavirus crisis.

VIP at the third resort was shoving these and similar snacks at us every time I stepped in for a hot tea or Perrier, until I finally just started saying No more. You ask for something once, and they start thinking you want it every time.

Many of the VIP services room at the casino resorts are dry these days - no food no beverage - but this one still provided full beverage service and sealed snacks.

I'm no longer a fan of hotel hygiene products - many years ago I used to hoard their little shampoos and conditioners - but I couldn't resist keeping some bars of this.

Nowhere near the level of the "600 bars of Neutrogena soap" from Fear and Loathing, but basically the same product.

Happy Thanksgiving!

The exact day by day details of play are posted at the TruePassage forum but here is the summary:

Final chips plus winner's envelope. Just under $74,000. - representing the take home total across three resorts.


Chips converted to winner's check:


---

As far as the hotel bill - over a month in a thousand dollar a night suite at this third resort, forgettaboutit. The bill was about nothing. The below concerns the third resort we stayed at. I posted elsewhere the details of the other two resorts we stayed at for over two weeks prior to this third resort, and everything was comp'ed there too.

At this third resort, which is where we ended up staying the longest, we had to move after twenty some nights due to the Nevada regulation against "residents" living in hotel rooms, and the bill for that portion, the first leg of the stay at this third resort:



This had one resort fee that had not yet been comp'ed, and once this was removed,

ended up at thirty-four dollars! The folio did not show any of the room service, which was fully comp'ed off, tips and all. That is unusual - I haven't seen room service tips disappear alongside the food.

Also comp'ed off were some two thousand dollars in spa services.

Obviously as well - daily resort fees - all comp'ed off.

The reason the tips that were not comp'ed off are so low, is that almost all of these represent take-out - for take-out I'd tip anywhere from two to five dollars. The way I looked at it, a full meal, spread out over an hour or two, deserved the usual full service tip, but to place food that the chef had already placed into containers in plastic bags and hand it to me, I figured a small token tip was enough.

As far as tipping cocktail waitresses and VIP staff, I kept a supply of $5. bills for that. I'd cash one of my winning $100. checks every other day or so, and tip all of those fives out.

As well, I put significant (up to $250.) tips for the dealers on the side of my own bets. I'd say, without a doubt, that during the course of my stay I tipped out easily at least ten grand to the dealers. They all love me.

The second half of the stay in the suite at this third resort, was also almost fully comp'ed, including another fifteen hundred or so in spa.

There were about forty-five dollars in food that the host hadn't comp'ed yet visible on that screen, which he handled before we checked out. He did not comp the spa retail, which left the final bill between the two stays in the two identical 1300 sq. ft. suites, at around six hundred dollars. A mere pittance, and representation of a solid forty grand or even more of comps.

By the way, to give you an idea of the level of play I was giving them - and to FURTHER demonstrate that one need not lose to get comp'ed fully - for anyone who knows, there is one restaurant on the list there that is not even owned by the third resort, and yet the host comp'ed it too. That is rare. When they comp an outside restaurant they have to cut them a check for the full amount.

So that was our - almost seven weeks in Vegas.

By the way, I didn't get any of that spa stuff. I'm a thoroughbred, in that all I do in Vegas is play, go to the gym religiously for at least an hour each time at least every other day, and eat well and have constant sex. My gaming sessions are one a day only, and might be just a couple of hours, although some were as long as twelve hours.
I might stop by the pool just to see the sun for ten minutes every now and then.

My wife enjoyed all the spa.

Fully comp'ed all the way, and take home just under $74,000. across three resorts. Given how much I tipped out to dealers in winning bets alongside mine, and in cash to cocktail waitresses, VIP staff, bellmen and other assorted employees, and also some cash that we spent, in all, a great, successful trip.

I asked the host at the third resort (only) about my stats, and he confirmed, on THEIR computer they had me winning just under 53K, theoretical loss just under 80K, play about 77 hours average bet just under 1200. I'll get around to asking about my stats at the other resorts too, but what I know for sure is that everything was comp'ed and I WON at all three resorts.

Put another way - here are all of the markers I pulled and paid back at the third resort, which is where we stayed the longest. I lost track adding them all up, but close to a million.

Stacked up:


Spread out:

It wasn't easy I am telling you, just because I won almost each day doesn't mean that I was ahead at all moments of each day. All's well that ends well though. The take home is what matters!


Okay, it's time to burn that 1000 they gave us!

"What makes baccarat dangerous for casinos is that, due to the large amounts of money bet and the thin house edge, players have the potential to win serious money at the casino's expense. ... So if a guy is betting $10,000 a hand, he could conceivably win $1 million from [them]."

I taught myself, so to speak, how to play chess and later, poker. This entertaining thread might lead me to actually delve into baccarat one of these days.

I'm wondering if I'm less likely to get barred from the casino for playing Spanish 21 instead of regular blackjack, because nobody counts cards with all the 10's missing.

ChumpChange: I've been banned for winning too much too consistently at blackjack, but no one has ever molested me for winning at baccarat.

FTB: While in general I would refrain from advocating gambling, this is after all a gambling site so I assume that most everyone here...already gambles. I will say that in Baccarat there are times when streaks / recurring patterns occur such that if you have any sense at all, you will win easily, and oftentimes, very big.

For example the last shoe I played on the last day of this most recent Vegas trip: after about ten hands it became apparent that banker was running ONCE only. In other words, that EVERY time bank hit, the next hand would be player. I detected the pattern very early on and started chanting it, "Bank runs only one, and then player!" It was incredible how consistently this happened. Every time bank ran one, I'd plop what felt like a pretty big bet on bank...and win. I mean it didn't matter how low bank drew initially or how high player drew (even to natural 8), bank would still win...every time on every such hand that presented itself, ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF THE SHOE without fail, without exception. I wish I had taken a picture of that shoe, but I was so excited and animated by the end as my stack of purple chips kept rising, that I forgot to do it before the dealer cleared the board. I even tore up my paper score card before I thought to take a picture of it.

Now, if you’re a ploppie who just bets the bank and thinks that the prior history of the shoe has no effect on its future, then you might as well not play this game. But for me, once I realized that pattern, on that last shoe of my trip, every time the bank won, I’d plop a couple grand on player, and get paid, and this was after I had pussy footed around too many times and bet only around 800 on each such hand.

Now, given that pattern, why didn’t I just empty the tray? The dealer kept saying – “bet ten thousand” (the limit was twenty) and the pit boss, “All In player!” Well, this sort of thing is easier said than done. As the recurring pattern keeps presenting itself, you start thinking, well sh*t, maybe THIS is the hand where the pattern will break, so I better not go hog wild and risk a lot more chips than I have been winning per hand so far on this anticipated event. But in that shoe, the pattern NEVER broke – and I ended up winning $18,000., with ease, that session.

If I'd really pressed it, the way I used to play many years ago, I would have easily taken $200,000. on that shoe. All it really takes is winning at table limit on ONE hand of a pattern, discernible sequence, or run, then, you're ready to place table limit on the next hand because at worst, you'll wind up back at even (minus at worst commission if the two bets are on bank hands). Win TWO table limit hands on a pattern or sequence won, and now you have nothing to lose...at worst, you end up one table limit ahead even if you lose the third. Or, and this is a much safer way to go, if you're pressing your bet into an anticipated pattern, eventually you Will reach table limit anyway as long as the pattern keeps up, and win the next table limit hand, and...you're gone. And so on. It's in these types of scenarios that the big players empty the tray.

It's really not much different from day trading on a stock that is running. You might just sit there and watch it, let it get away, thinking no way this thing is going to keep moving up - and let's face it - there is NO guarantee it will, but...jump on board, forty points later, and you're GONE, the sky's the limit, as it ends up running a hundred and forty points that day. So who wins a hundred plus points one day at the stock market? The same sort of lucky bastards who are fearless and ride the baccarat streaks to their conclusion. Now, these days, I don't particularly LOOK to hit home runs...not in the stock market, not at the Baccarat tables, slow and steady (such as $74K over close to seven weeks in Vegas) is good enough for me...I'm more there to have fun (and winning is fun, losing is not) than to make a killing...but...I know a run when I see it, and I won't miss too many opportunities, even if I will tend these days to be conservative and underbet.

My local casino only has $25-$2,000 or $50-$3,000 baccarat tables. I'd have to drive to the Canadian border to find $15K limit baccarat tables, but I hear they limit blackjack maximums to the $300-$500 range.

As for craps, I've got to deal with $5-$500, $5/$10-$1000, or $10/$15-$2000 tables.

Spreading $25-$1000 vs. spreading $100-$1000
https://www.reddit.com/r/blackjack/comments/jz4cna/spreading_251000_vs_spreading_1001000/

How about a food based panoply of MDawg's latest Vegas trip? I took pictures of by no means all of our meals, but here are some:




























This was my staple breakfast most mornings, eggs over medium, chicken sausage, pancakes:









Truffle fries were a regular thing too:


Massive veal chop:

















Chicken noodle soup, another near daily staple:

Fruit, fruit, fruit EVERY day:

This is a croissant french toast dish, had that regularly too:












Salads daily of course:

Quote: ChumpChange

Spreading $25-$1000 vs. spreading $100-$1000
https://www.reddit.com/r/blackjack/comments/jz4cna/spreading_251000_vs_spreading_1001000/

My general spread is $100. to $10,000. and that includes at blackjack, although typically I'll cap it at $5000. with blackjack.

Currently at Venetian anyone off the street may bet $35,000. at Baccarat. How's that for serious action? I had one hand this trip where I placed $10,000. on bank (not my largest bet this trip, I had a few that were a bit larger). I drew a nine, and was getting ready to collect when she turned over a nine on player. Tie.

I debated for what seemed like a long time, pulled my bet, and called for a free hand. Bank opened a nine - again, but before I could kick myself for missing the opportunity, player opened the same nine too.

I stood up, paced a while, came back, and plopped the two chips $10,000. again, on bank. I drew a nine but this time - player opened a one.

SLAM! the winning cards on the table, leap up hands in the air triumphantly, and everyone around who had been watching smiles. But try to tell me that was easy - to hang tough through a tie and a free hand that ties, all with nines. But, if I had free handed that third hand I'd have a hard time wiping the memory of that missed win from my mind. Win more than a few hands like that, and it's hard for anyone to convince you that you can't win at Baccarat.

Quote: MDawg

How about a food based panoply of MDawg's latest Vegas trip?

How was the octopus?

I have north-Mediterranean ancestors, always looking for good pulpo.

Quote: MDawg

Quote: Wizard

Cross-forum quoting, personal insult. Three-day suspension.

I was not aware of the no mentioning other forums rule. I guess that is on me, so I accept that. However, I reject that "fiction" is a personal insult. I did not say liar. MDawg used that word not me. I am saying I don't believe his claims and story as stated. And I don't believe them because they defy the mathematics. That opinion is my right and is not an insult.


Mike I don't know what is going on here that you won't call this guy out. His claims as stated defy the math, just as much as seeing 18 yo's in a row, just as much as Rob Singer's claims of winning millions using progressive wagering to overcome -EV, just as much as the frequent people that show up here touting martingale. You call all these people out because their claims defy the math involved. Yet with MDawg you say nothing. Mike you are the gambling math expert. Your reputation is all about the math. What you don't say matters just as much as what you do say in this kind of situation.

I accept that MDawg is a high roller and bets a lot and loses a lot and that because he loses more than he wins the casinos comp him generously. But the idea that he wins nearly every session and every day as he claims is bogus. Most of us here, including you Mike, know how the casino industry works. The simply are not comping a guy high end suites for 5-6 weeks at a time, that shows wins on every trip. Ridiculous! Now if you need to suspend or ban me, because I don't believe these claims AS STATED, that defy math, you do what you need to do.

Quote: kewlj

I did not say liar.

You've never called MD a liar?

Quote: kewlj

Dawg is a high roller and bets a lot and loses a lot and that because he loses more than he wins the casinos comp him generously.

This is coming out of nowhere and I resent that you are once again calling me a liar. I have stated categorically that I both win and am comp'ed, including on this last almost seven week trip to Vegas. On what do you base your utter fabrication of the facts here?

If you want to make something up, at least have it not contradict my testimony.

Quote: MDawg

This is coming out of nowhere and I resent that you are once again calling me a liar. I have stated categorically that I both win and am comp'ed, including on this last almost seven week trip to Vegas. On what do you base your utter fabrication of the facts here?

I did NOT call you a liar. I have specifically said that I don't believe your claims AS STATED. That is my right. And I have given the reason, they defy the mathematics.

I am not going to continue this with you. I voiced my opinion, which I have a right to do. I guess if Mike is going to allow and embrace this kind of thing, there is not much I can do about it except to put you on ignore like so many other AP's and members that know better.

Quote: kewlj

MDawg is a high roller and bets a lot and loses a lot and that because he loses more than he wins the casinos comp him generously.

It's been explained that casinos comp based on theoretical loss.

Is that not true?...do they comp based on actual wins or losses?

Quote: kewlj

I did NOT call you a liar. I have specifically said that I don't believe your claims AS STATED. That is my right. And I have given the reason, they defy the mathematics.

No, it's not your right not at this forum to state that the clear facts that someone presents are false, absent some direct proof, according to how the forum rule has been explained to us by the Wizard. I have stated that I am comp'ed and that I win, including specifically during this last almost seven week trip to Vegas. Again, are you saying I am lying? I want to make it clear that I am not goading you into anything, you came out of nowhere with this "theory" of yours, and I have stated categorically prior that I both win and am comp'ed.

And again, if you are so sure that I am lying, why risk a mere forum suspension over it? Accept my Wager - I will return to Vegas to prove that I am truthful and collect your $50,000.

Quote: kewlj

I did NOT call you a liar. I have specifically said that I don't believe your claims AS STATED.

Saying that you don't believe him is equivalent to calling him a liar.

How else can that be interpreted?

Quote: coachbelly

Saying that you don't believe him is equivalent to calling him a liar.

How else can that be interpreted?

It can be interpreted that I don't believe him, because THAT is what I said. I didn't call him a liar, I said I don't believe these claims as stated.

On this forum, probably 100 different people have voiced their opinion that they don't believe Alan saw 18 yo's in row. No one was suspended for that opinion. Especially when the claims defy the math! Not believing someone is not a personal insult, it is a right.

Similarly many people on this very forum has stated that they don't believe Rob Singer's claims that his progressive wagering can overcome -EV for long-term winning. Wizard himself said that. It is NOT a personal insult to not believe someone and especially when the claims defy math.

Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis. That sort of thing, calling people liars, is not acceptable from what the Wizard said - UNLESS you have direct proof. You've now called me a liar no less than five times and keep repeating the same.

Stop calling me a liar - instead, put your money where your mouth is and accept the Wager.

Quote: coachbelly

How was the octopus?

I have north-Mediterranean ancestors, always looking for good pulpo.

Quote: MDawg

It was excellent. It had a delicate but barbecued taste, and my wife is the octopus fan...I generally don't even like octopus that much but this, from Costa di Mare at Wynn, was great.

Quote: kewlj

I said I don't believe these claims as stated.

You are saying that he's not telling the truth.

Quote: MDawg

Stop calling me a liar - instead, put your money where your mouth is and accept the Wager.

Again, I didn't call you a liar. That is your word. Guilty conscience?

No one is going to accept the term you have laid out. It is not an honest wager. Any high roller can get the documentation you are planning to use as proof simply by asking the host. Here is an example: Losing High roller says to host: "I need a printout showing that I am a winning player or my wife isn't going to allow me to gamble any more". He would have that documentation in about 60 seconds.

Nobody is that stupid. Any wager would have to involve witnesses, watching your play, every session, to see if you win every session as you claim and if you are an overall winner. Anything else is nonsense. The other stipulation is going to be that we pick the casinos, tables and dealers. There is going to be no opportunity for collusion with casino personnel favorable to you. No opportunity to stage anything. If you can win every session and win all the time, this shouldn't be an issue.

Now if you want to make arrangements for a wager under these terms, I can put together a group that will take the action. That way we will have plenty of witnesses. Maybe someone can even film it with a body cam. So if you are agreeable to a fair and honest wager of these terms, let me know.

Quote: kewlj

Losing High roller says to host: "I need a printout showing that I am a winning player or my wife isn't going to allow me to gamble any more". He would have that documentation in about 60 seconds.

Do you have first-hand knowledge of this ever happening, or is it conjecture?