The Adventures of MDawg

I'll give you an example:

I just ran through a shoe on the WoO Game and have pictures if you want proof. The starting deck composition is:

0's-128 30.769%
1's-32 7.69231%
2's-32 7.69231%
3's-32 7.69231%
4's-32 7.69231%
5's-32 7.69231%
6's-32 7.69231%
7's-32 7.69231%
8's-32 7.69231%
9's-32 7.69231%

Okay, so the best deck composition point in this shoe for Banker (Player actually never had a lower House Edge than on the first hand, this time):

0's-8 18.605%
1's-3 6.9767%
2's-1 2.3256%
3's-4 9.3023%
4's-2 4.6512%
5's-4 9.3023%
6's-7 16.279%
7's-6 13.953%
8's-4 9.3023%
9's-4 9.3023%

Intuitively, I'm going to say that I think that's very unusual, but I haven't really studied Baccarat. Still, well over half of the deck is 5's-9's when that's not even 40% of the starting composition? That seems somewhat unusual.

Even in this situation, Banker still had a 0.0527% House Edge working against the bettor. Can you imagine? That's a really great set up for Banker, relatively speaking, and is still losing.

At no point in the entire shoe could you have bet Banker or Player at an advantage.

The Tie Bet actually had a 3.2896% Advantage for the bettor on the final hand. Tie had a probability of 11.4766%, so even though that's a decent percentage advantage, you're still quite likely to lose the bet anyway. Counting tie could theoretically be done, but you'd have to deal with huge variance. There was once a big discussion with Teliot over on AP Heat in which he analyzed the possibility of betting KNOWING that the next result could only be a tie----let's just say that doesn't come up very frequently. LOL

Also, even if you could bet a good bit on Tie, could you imagine sitting and watching entire shoes of Baccarat to hopefully have a chance to make one or two bets? I don't know the exact numbers offhand, but you don't expect to have an advantageous bet every shoe, or anything.

Quote: coachbelly

If the house edge is known, the playing strategy is unknown,
and the playing period is undefined, then can the probability of
winning for a period (session) be determined?

No. Actually, other than the first hand of the shoe (assuming he makes one), I couldn't tell you his probability of winning any individual bet. The deck composition makes that variable.

Even if you made every hand, "Off the top," as a hypothetical...I couldn't give you the probability for a winning session without, "Session," being strictly defined and the system being strictly defined. How could I?

I was wondering how photographing casino chips wouldn't be a ratfink enabling move.

Quote: kewlj

falsifying pictorial evidence for this trip.

MDawg doesn't post photos from trips in progress anymore.
He explains that here...

Quote: MDawg

For security reasons many forum members have advised me to cease with any real time specific pictures that might tie me to a particular casino, so I stopped doing that about a year ago.

Another member made the following comment....

Quote: Expectedvalue

why does he never post pictures from a hand in progress.

MDawg posted examples of when he posted multiple pictures from a year ago.

I tried to catch MDawg, but came up empty.

I was dead wrong, I apologize.

Dawg explained that AFTER he was caught! And that doesn't fly, because we are talking about pictures of stacks of chips. Such a picture posted on a current trip is designed for false credibility. It is intentionally meant to mislead!

Again, I am calling on Wizard to make a ruling and I am doing so publicly, not running around behind everyone's back with tattle tale private messaging.

Quote: Mission146

I couldn't give you the probability for a winning session without, "Session," being strictly defined and the system being strictly defined. How could I?

Given the conditions outlined earlier, if you can't determine the probability
for a single winning "session", then can you determine the probability of
consecutive winning sessions?

Quote: kewlj

we are talking about pictures of stacks of chips

The photos were apparently originally posted some time ago,
and then posted again as a reply to a current inquiry.

I don't recall MDawg claiming that he is currently at Wynn.

I'm not sure he would disclose where he's playing now
by posting photos of chips from that casino.

Quote: coachbelly

The photos were apparently originally posted some time ago,
and then posted again as a reply to a current inquiry.

I don't recall MDawg claiming that he is currently at Wynn.

I'm not sure he would disclose where he's playing now
by posting photos of chips from that casino.

You did the right thing by calling this out. Now you are doing a "belly" flip flop, or belly flop for short. Lol.

The intent was to mislead and you know it. Look if I posted a report about how I won 12 grand today (I won considerably less) and then posted pictures of stacks of chips from a year ago or that may not have even been mine, would you call that misleading? Of course you would.

Anyway, We'll let Wizard make the call when he is around. For transparency, I did notify Mike by PM to take a look at this thread.

Quote: kewlj

The intent was to mislead and you know it.

I don't think you are correct.

One member commented that MD never posts photos from the table,
and MDawg offered photos from the table that he posted months ago
as proof that he does.

You are overlooking that he had posted the same photos months ago.

If he meant to mislead, then he wouldn't use photos that could be traced
to an earlier posting for that purpose.

Baseball season and KJ just struck out!

He can redeem himself. My suggestion is a thread: “The REAL adventures of Kewlj”

Quote: DeMango

Baseball season and KJ just struck out!

He can redeem himself. My suggestion is a thread: “The REAL adventures of Kewlj”

I didn't strike out. The pictures which are from last year, posted during this current trip are misleading. If Mdawg was intentionally posting previous pictures to make a point that he has "in the past" posted pictures at the table, he should have made that very clear.

I don't think that is what he was doing and neither did coach belly from his initial response. Belly is flip-flopping now, but his initial response makes it clear.

its that philly in you KJ if Mdawg is able to to capture 250 units time and time again run well ahead of 5 standard deviation and kiss you off w/ a cherry on top why are you getting your panties in a bunch?=/
you should see the movie satans touch 1984 its on youtube good film on gambling cheesy acting but it works like a bad toothless hooker does the job all the same

just think 999 other mdawgs are the pits right now losing their shirts like clockwork as its suppose to be but 1 Dawg will rise above the math and shove it in your face!!

Quote: kewlj

his initial response makes it clear.

Here is my initial response...

Quote: coachbelly

Either you are not at the Wynn,
or you took these photos during an earlier trip.

As it turns out, I was wrong...it's not an either/or, both can be true.

What's not true, is that MDawg meant to be misleading.

Swing and miss at a pitch outside the strike zone,
that's 3, and kewlj...you're out.

Quote: dawinnaatlozins

its that philly in you KJ if Mdawg is able to to capture 250 units time and time again run well ahead of 5 standard deviation and kiss you off w/ a cherry on top why are you getting your panties in a bunch?=/

No that is not correct MDawg's top wins are about 18 units at a time. At least currently.

If Mdwag is running hot and you can't accept it then don't deal w/ it alright?
running hot is hard to do in gambling running cold is hard to do in gambling
i imagine theres another Mdawg who is bankrupt due to the horrible luck and the other 998 Mdawgs are running as should (nothing too crazy)

if one thing i have to credit Mdawg is for he has picture christopher mitchell doesnt have picture of his chips at the felt so 1 credit to Mdawg -1 to Cm

Quote: dawinnaatlozins

=dIf Mdwag is running hot and you can't accept it then don't deal w/ it alright?

I was telling the truth.

Quote: dawinnaatlozins

its that philly in you KJ if Mdawg is able to to capture 250 units time and time again run well ahead of 5 standard deviation and kiss you off w/ a cherry on top why are you getting your panties in a bunch?=/

I forgot to mention that if you were trying to get personal with a member in the above quote it won't be tolerated on this site.

If is the biggest word in the dictionary but i don't expect a pea brain like yourself to understand that

im rootin for ya Mdawg, show them how its done!

And we are supposed to believe your are new and not re-incarnated.

I always think of Jerry Glanville, Football coach who asked a ref if he knew what NFL stood for. Not For Long if he kept on making those calls, Jerry replied. Our new poster: NFL!

Quote: dawinnaatlozins

If is the biggest word in the dictionary but i don't expect a pea brain like yourself to understand that

im rootin for ya Mdawg, show them how its done!

The biggest word in the dictionary is:

Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilikavolkoneosis

Which is a lung disease caused by inhaling volcanic ash.

Watch the first fifteen seconds of this video If you want to see how it's pronounced. The girl is demonstrating her intelligence by showing she actually does know the longest word in the dictionary

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P03tBfaRS6A

DarKoz i cant believe people actually think you lured homeless people to the casino for multi-card advantage play
that would be damn near impossible, would be easier to get a pack of wild stray dogs to follow you than a homeless person to do what you ask for even if you were to reward them, do you live in long island city? maybe we can team up i know some good free play action here maybe we could help 1 another

Oh yeah he is brand new here....not :)

John Dont be a pee brain ok?

Day 16 play

Today was the most volatile session in some time. First shoe I was doing all right, getting somewhere then next thing you know I lost the 8K marker. I won a thousand call bet, as the shoe ended. Beginning of second shoe I went ahead and pulled a 20K marker so that I had the ammo I needed. The one pit boss remarked, "You really need that much?" and I said, "Yes, sometimes I feel more comfortable with more in front of me." Next thing you know I was down about six of that new marker which meant a combined -14K for the session, and I slammed 10K on Player and won 6 over 0 with a six card draw. I left that standing there for a while just to admire it. The other pit boss kept shaking his head and saying, "I'm glad you won, but - betting ten thousand to win nothing? What is that about." What he was getting at is that all the bet did was bring me back to even as far as the first marker, plus an extra four grand, which meant -4K for the session. In other words I risked a lot to just get back towards even. Still, if I hadn't done it I felt like I would have slowly gone down the tubes.

But then, little by little I kept losing as the shoe remained random, and I actually lost the second marker too, including via a couple of very large bets where the the other side either opened a natural or I just couldn't draw to catch up.. Down -28K now.

I asked for another 20K, so I was now in 48K and I didn't do too well losing more, until I entered an 11 bank run just one after it had started, with a few thousand at the top, and pressed to 4000, 5000, 6000. On the 6000 hand the Baccarat shoe malfunctioned and started flashing and I pulled the bet, but as soon as they were ready again I put the bet back up. Boom! another win. Six thousand! I then made a big mistake - I left only 4000 up and ran the bank out, instead of continuing the press to 7000, 8000, 9000, etc. On each that I won 4000 I kept declaring,

"That would have been seven."

"That would have been eight."

"That would have been nine."

Anyway, even after that, and the end of the run, I was STILL down a couple grand as the shoe ended, because I owed some 1600 and change in commission! and had to pay it.

Prior to this run the same pit boss who had disapproved of my ten K bet told me what he thought of the board, by turning it sideways, to indicate that it meant absolutely nothing. I told him, Come on, it depends on the shoe. Good shoe, it means everything. Bad shoe, little or nothing.

Third shoe, first I dumped some to where I was -4K again, then I got a perfect chop. I felt like calling that disbelieving pit boss back over to tell him in his face that the board was now meaning everything, but I was too busy raking the chips in. I didn't even bet much on this chop, but did press a hundred more on each win, and put a hundred on the side for the dealer when I got to 1100 and when the chop ended, I counted up and I was ahead +2300, and called it a day.

I shoved the four stacks of High Society plus eight thousand into the center and said those magic two words, "MARKERS DOWN!" and that was the end of that session. As I was talking my head off after almost losing my arse, but coming back to ahead, who should show up but the player from the other day who dropped twenty. I told the player about the side by side Player streaks that had come up soon after he left, and that I kept mentioning to the dealers that the player left before the miracle happened, but anyway, that was his problem today, not mine. I had made my comeback and won again.

I won, dealers won, all in all a good day. I tried to argue for a 5000 average bet from the one pit boss, but wouldn't go for it. Finally, the other pit boss put me down for 2000, which is quite respectable.

Ole!

even if - it requires some reaching down deep just to get there.

Let's hope I don't have any more sessions like this. Was more than a little crazy today.

Okay I just logged out to take a look back at what has been said in this thread. I blocked ExpectedValue long ago, back when he was questioning the fact that I get comp'ed. I just scrolled back and ExpectedValue posted something about how he could not PM me. Yes - that's because I've had him blocked for a year or so. I have others here either blocked or set to ignore in my mind. I might read unblocked posts, but I don't even respond to most. As far as the chips, I posted them because I wanted to point out that some of you are obsessing over nothing, while the only thing I obsess over while in the casino is stacks of chips. It was not posted in response to anyone or any question. I can't even read what ExpectedValue writes he is blocked, and the only reason I noticed the question about the chips from CoachBelly is that I was logged out when I looked at that post by CoachBelly, which was quoting ExpectedValue.

Sheesh. C'mon some of you guys, don't you have something better to do? I'm out here betting hundreds of thousands cumulatively find something productive to do yourselves, please. It's actually rather insulting that a person is risking huge money and all some people may find to do is nitpick over nothing. I am sure you have something better to do than waste time on that sort of negative thinking.

Do not assume that everything I say or post here is in response to what some of you post. You are mostly duly ignored or blocked.

Quote: MDawg

Do not assume that everything I say or post here is in response to what some of you post. You are mostly duly ignored or blocked.

Ah, we finally get down to the nub: this guy just likes to hear himself talk, or to be more specific, to see his words of derring-do in print.

If you don't praise and worship him or if you dare to question his claims he says you get blocked.

All cultists need to winnow out the non-believers, eh?

I wouldn't expect the casino to root for him to win when he bets so recklessly, but his normal progressions seem to bring him back up, the case bets are beyond risky.

Congrats on your 50th consecutive winning session.

Quote: BoSox

Deliberate antagonistic behavior! I do not know who is worse MDawg or his minions.

I work in security and I'm the director of security at several properties under our brand. I deal in (#1) visual facts, (#2) right now facts, (#3) first-hand Witnesses and (#4) everything of a similar nature. Furthermore, I don't deal in fallacies and one-sided dreams. I call it the way I see it and I mean physically and the way I literally see it with plenty of substantiated facts, real-pure-and genuine facts. Period!

Quote: Marcusclark66

I work in security and I'm the director of security at several properties under our brand. I deal in (#1) visual facts, (#2) right now facts, (#3) first-hand Witnesses and (#4) everything of a similar nature. Furthermore, I don't deal in fallacies and one-sided dreams. I call it the way I see it and I mean physically and the way I literally see it with plenty of substantiated facts, real-pure-and genuine facts. Period!

Quote: coachbelly

It's not that nobody believes you...it's that nobody cares.

Wise up.

Quote: kewlj

Anyway, We'll let Wizard make the call when he is around. For transparency, I did notify Mike by PM to take a look at this thread.

I looked at page 376 of this thread, which I loathe, and didn't see any pictures. Can you please give me the URL of the exact offending post. You can get it by clicking "permalink."

Quote: terapined

Quote: Marcusclark66
I work in security and I'm the director of security at several properties under our brand. I deal in (#1) visual facts, (#2) right now facts, (#3) first-hand Witnesses and (#4) everything of a similar nature. Furthermore, I don't deal in fallacies and one-sided dreams. I call it the way I see it and I mean physically and the way I literally see it with plenty of substantiated facts, real-pure-and genuine facts. Period!

Quote: coachbelly
It's not that nobody believes you...it's that nobody cares.
Wise up.

Hello terapined,

You may have violated forum protocol by presenting my quote from another thread
as a reply to Marcusclark66's post above in this thread.

I suspect this may result that your participation in your own thread
will be suspended for a few days...for REAL.

Was it worth it?

Quote: Wizard

I looked at page 376 of this thread, which I loathe, and didn't see any pictures. Can you please give me the URL of the exact offending post. You can get it by clicking "permalink."

Try page 371.

I ask that this person be suspended for malicious prosecution. There is no basis for claiming that that picture of my past chip stacks was posted for any reason other than just to illustrate that, as posted in the post itself:

One thing that makes me feel better is winning stacks and towers of checks I can't even see over.

That's it. I posted some pictures of times where I had a lot of checks in front of me, from various occasions, to illustrate that point is all. If this person would like to withdraw this request to press charges, I am fine to let the matter die right here and now.

Quote: kewlj

Try page 371.

MDawg posted the photos at 5:38.

You replied at 5:48, 6:24, 6:30, 6:51 & 7:01

Then at 11:01 you wrote this...

Quote: kewlj

Hold on a minute here! HOLD THE PRESSES! Mdawg just got CAUGHT

What do you mean, he "just got caught" ?

What changed between when you replied to his post the first 5 times,
and when you replied for the 6th time?

Quote: MDawg

I ask that this person be suspended for malicious prosecution. There is no basis for claiming that that picture of my past chip stacks was posted for any reason other than just to illustrate that, as posted in the post itself:

One thing that makes me feel better is winning stacks and towers of checks I can't even see over.

That's it. I posted some pictures of times where I had a lot of checks in front of me, from various occasions, to illustrate that point is all. If this person would like to withdraw this request to press charges, I am fine to let the matter die right here and now.

There are many low life motivations some of the naysayers get some narcissistic benefit from, MD. Incidentally, does blocking them block one from seeing them, or everyone from seeing them? This kind of function is something I could benefit greatly from!

I'm utterly shocked that Wellbush took this long to show up in this thread.

Hi Wellbush. Pretty ridiculous I agree. It's not okay for a man to post pictures of his own chips from past sessions to illustrate how much he loves having large stacks of chips?

Once you block someone, you don't see his posts at all unless you are logged out. For example, I have had ExpectedValue blocked for about a year now, and some others blocked for different periods of time. Some people I just ignore but do not block. I haven't responded to anything this person who is accusing me, has posted, in some time.

Quote: MDawg

Hi Wellbush. Pretty ridiculous I agree. It's not okay for a man to post pictures of his own chips from past sessions to illustrate how much he loves having large stacks of chips?

Once you block someone, you don't see their posts at all unless you are logged out. For example, I have had ExpectedValue blocked for about a year now, and some others blocked for different periods of time. Some people I just ignore but do not block. I haven't responded to anything this person who is accusing me, has posted, in some time.

Is the user you blocked MD, just blocked from your view, or everyone's view?

Your view only. Also that blocked person may not send you PMs.

Quote: Marcusclark66

I work in security and I'm the director of security at several properties under our brand. I deal in (#1) visual facts, (#2) right now facts, (#3) first-hand Witnesses and (#4) everything of a similar nature. Furthermore, I don't deal in fallacies and one-sided dreams. I call it the way I see it and I mean physically and the way I literally see it with plenty of substantiated facts, real-pure-and genuine facts. Period!

B79 was also a host, oh wait, no he wasn't, he made a sockpuppet pretending to be a host and actually convinced some people that he was.

Quote: coachbelly

How could you possibly know what MDwag's intent was, you seem so sure of yourself?

What was his intent when he posted up a picture and claimed it was from one casino when in fact, it wasn't from that casino?

What do you have to say about his 5.5 billion to one shot?

Just got back with the take out food. Probably eating a little too much red meat and shellfish while in Vegas.

Excuse us while we dine.

P.S. As your attorney I recommend NIACIN, the flush variety, to beat down that cholesterol and triglycerides, such as derived from those medium rare ribeyes. When I was a teenager one of my friends believed in it as a cure-all flush-all out of your system drug, and I have been taking some every now and then all my adult life.

Quote: AxelWolf

How could you possibly know what MDwag's intent was, you seem so sure of yourself?

What was his intent when he posted up a picture and claimed it was from one casino when in fact, it wasn't from that casino?

What do you have to say about his 5.5 billion to one shot?

There is nothing in the quote box, so I'm not sure what you are replying to.

As far as the intent goes, I don't know what that refers to.

As far as him claiming that he posted a picture from one casino,
not being from that casino...I don't know what you are talking about.

I can comment on his 5.5 billion to one shot, if you explain what that means.

Other than that, I understand all of your questions.

Quote: MDawg

Just got back with the take out food. Probably eating a little too much red meat and shellfish while in Vegas.

Excuse us while we dine.

P.S. As your attorney I recommend NIACIN, the flush variety, to beat down that cholesterol and triglycerides, such as derived from those medium rare ribeyes. When I was a teenager one of my friends believed in it as a cure-all flush-all out of your system drug, and I have been taking some every now and then all my adult life.

PLEASE DON'T ANYONE TAKE THIS ADVICE, IT'S HORRIBLE ADVICE. It's either a waste of money because it won't do crap, or you have to take such high doses that could be dangerous to your health.


Unless you have something specifically wrong with you where you are lacking something, Vitamins are nothing but a con. Unfortunately, even some doctors have been fooled/conned by the vitamin industry.

Quote: MDawg

Hi Wellbush. Pretty ridiculous I agree. It's not okay for a man to post pictures of his own chips from past sessions to illustrate how much he loves having large stacks of chips?

Once you block someone, you don't see his posts at all unless you are logged out. For example, I have had ExpectedValue blocked for about a year now, and some others blocked for different periods of time. Some people I just ignore but do not block. I haven't responded to anything this person who is accusing me, has posted, in some time.

It's blatantly obvious you're genuine, MD. It's just that your results don't laterally fit into some naysayer's boxes

I find it interesting that Mdawg is blocking people on this forum. I block people on other forums that I am on that are allowed to issue personal attacks and lie and cuss like a 3rd grader. But that doesn't happen on this forum, so why would anyone need to block someone, unless of course you are a person that can't answer the challenges without LYING and attacking and cussing at people....then I guess you would block them. :/

Interesting that we have a number of new members popping up and surprise, surprise are supporting Mdawg. Am I allowed to ask the powers that be if these new members are blocking IP addresses or using one of those services that make it look like you are posting from somewhere else?

Quote: kewlj

I find it interesting that Mdawg is blocking people on this forum. I block people on other forums that I am on that are allowed to issue personal attacks and lie and cuss like a 3rd grader. But that doesn't happen on this forum, so why would anyone need to block someone, unless of course you are a person that can't answer the challenges without LYING and attacking and cussing at people....then I guess you would block them. :/

Interesting that we have a number of new members popping up and surprise, surprise are supporting Mdawg. Am I allowed to ask the powers that be if these new members are blocking IP addresses or using one of those services that make it look like you are posting from somewhere else?

There are more than enough naysayers on this website, so any suggestion that things are skewed in MD's favour, don't stack up!

Quote: kewlj

Am I allowed to ask the powers that be if these new members are blocking IP addresses or using one of those services that make it look like you are posting from somewhere else?

Members should get a fixed amount of challenges.

If a challenge is upheld, then you get that challenge back.

If not, then you lose that challenge and receive a short suspension.

If you lose your last challenge, then you lose the ability to post anymore.

That's the only way to keep members from making frivolous challenges,
constantly "pressing charges" and trying to get other members suspended.

Quote: coachbelly

Members should get a fixed amount of challenges.

If a challenge is upheld, then you get that challenge back.

If not, then you lose that challenge and receive a short suspension.

If you lose your last challenge, then you lose the ability to post anymore.

That's the only way to keep members from making frivolous challenges,
constantly "pressing charges" and trying to get other members suspended.

On "pressing charges" and trying to get others suspended: Today, I asked Mike for a ruling and if he agrees that the pictures were posted to be misleading, to consider issuing a penalty. And I did so publicly for transparency. Other than that I have NEVER contacted Mike privately and asked or suggest that anyone be suspended. Can Mdawg say the same or can you who speaks for Mdawg say the same? How many times has Mdawg requested members be suspended? I'll bet right now neither of you will answer.

As far as challenging a members claims, as I have said, there are many members that make claims, that I say to myself, that is likely not true. I only publicly challenge claims that 1.) defy math, meaning impossible or for those that like to say something is possible with ridiculously long odds, I will say "nearly" impossible. And 2) if the person continues to repeat the claim after numerous members tell them it can't be.

This repeating is a common troll tactic (and that is not calling anyone a troll). The theory is that you repeat the lie or claim enough and it becomes accepted as fact. So when someone is told their claim just can't be and their response is to come back and repeat the claim and repeat the claim, I am going to continue to challenge it.