Quote: AxelWolfBut that's isn't what the challenge was about.. unless that's how he NORMALLY BETS. And if that's the case, then he has been misleading everyone, He calls himself a high limit baccarat player.
This isn't what this challenge is about.... to YOU! Specific terms have been laid out, and as far as I am concerned, and if I were the arbiter, have been agreed to.
Mike will be able to state that MDawg's approximate average bet size is $XXX. And he will certainly be able to easily remember the high bet amount. It will be up to each forum member to decide if MDawg fairly represented himself. Axel, I can assure you, MDawg doesn't care what you think the challenge is about!
(Since CoachBelly and MarcusClark are suspended I am helping out here....!)
The Wiz can keep whatever record he is able to keep. That record is for Wiz consumption not public consumption. But Wiz should confirm he feels able to track well enough to make a call about if MDawg won or lost and whether he “flat bet” too much. Wiz will be the decider of whether MDawg met the terms laid out.
MDawg will write up a report of what happened that day in his normal style with his normal level of detail. Just as he reports his other days playing. Wiz will reply to say whether MDawg’s report is accurate or not. If Wiz disagrees with the accuracy the Wiz can point out why (without giving away any identifying attributes of MDawg or the details of his betting secret sauce.)
Maybe MDawg will invite Wiz to his awesome suite and MDawg can tell us about that also.
Quote: ExpectedvalueKeeping track of someone adding a chip? So you are saying you could never be misled by a slight of hand? What is there to disagree about?
No, that's not what I said. If I am able to see the table, I can see what is bet on each hand, and keep a running tally of the results. It is NOT HARD!!!!!!
Playerbet 900 lose
Quote: unJonHere’s my suggestion to break this logjam:
The Wiz can keep whatever record he is able to keep. That record is for Wiz consumption not public consumption. But Wiz should confirm he feels able to track well enough to make a call about if MDawg won or lost and whether he “flat bet” too much. Wiz will be the decider of whether MDawg met the terms laid out.
MDawg will write up a report of what happened that day in his normal style with his normal level of detail. Just as he reports his other days playing. Wiz will reply to say whether MDawg’s report is accurate or not. If Wiz disagrees with the accuracy the Wiz can point out why (without giving away any identifying attributes of MDawg or the details of his betting secret sauce.)
Maybe MDawg will invite Wiz to his awesome suite and MDawg can tell us about that also.
This makes a lot of sense. I am fine with that. Obviously - the Wizard is the judge, I am not the judge!
As well, I am sure Wizard will appreciate that the burden of writing up a lot will be removed from him.
I am not sure what ExpectedValue's issue is at this point...I have conceded every modification he has proposed. Wizard may record however he likes to verify for himself that the terms are met, and whether I win or lose.
I at a minimum need
From wizard
Bet amount
Side
Result
(In order obviously)
I reserve the right to edit above if I missed putting something imperative down before agreeing
Once I agree to what wizard lists he will record then we have a deal
And I have already stated that however the Wizard chooses to monitor is fine with me, as long as all that is disclosed by him is whether terms have been met and whether I win or lose.
If you continue to fish for more, it becomes obvious that you are simply reneging via trying to impose terms that were never made a part of this.
Really, this is odd, because you are making an issue out of a non-issue. Obviously the Wizard will act as judge as he sees fit.
Stop trying to input new terms!
As YET ANOTHER concession to you I agree to write up a "session report" with the same level of detail as I have provided on all my other sessions, and Wizard may verify it. Okay?
Quote: MDawgAnother amazingly sensible post by the DarkOz.
Quote: SOOPOOI gotta agree with MDawg on this latest twist. If the Wizard says he can verify the result of the wager without the need to write everything down, that is good enough for me.
Quote: SOOPOO to ExpectedValueWe can agree to disagree. If I was the judge I would have NO TROUBLE keeping a running tally in my head.
We now have a totally unacceptable situation..... MDawg agreeing with DarkOz, Soopoo agreeing with DarkOz, Soopoo agreeing (to disagree) with ExpectedValue, and OnceDear agreeing with just about everyone. $:o)
I take exception to this being called a wager, though. More of a challenge.
So. Mike observes, in any way he sees fit? takes whatever records he wishes and determines whether MDawg met Wizard's interpretation of the challenge... and presumable reports yea or nay to the forum.
Quote: ExpectedvalueWhat is there to disagree about?
I can't see any obstacles. Nor can I see new conditions. JFDI Guys. JFDI!
Quote: ExpectedvalueWe have no meeting of the minds then.
Just a shame, I tell ya.
Quote: ExpectedvalueMdWg would never agree, I would add 1k additional if he did. Just for fun I’ll add an additional 100 for wizard and 250 for mdawg if wizard sees his suite and then goes to front desk. Requests a folio and the name matches his I’d. No secrets given away there. Just an extra bone for the dawg
I emailed the contract to the Wizard at his request. He and I will be meeting as soon as possible to proceed with the Challenge.
As far as the new proposal, fund the Wizard with the $350. in bitcoin.
MrV.Quote: MrVJust a shame, I tell ya.
You did not edit your insulting post quickly enough. Go join CB and MC. I'll reduce the term from 7 to 3 days for at least trying to censor your post.
If anyone here sees any VALID issue that ExpectedValue has raised, as it relates to the agreed upon terms of the wager, say so now. If ExpectedValue has any issues with how the Wizard will judge the matter, he may raise those to him privately.
Quote: OnceDearMrV.
You did not edit your insulting post quickly enough. Go join CB and MC.
It is really quite amazing. The same people over and over and over and over. All you have to do is read what you wrote before you hurridly stab the send button. I mean, come on..
EV.... Just FYI, I've suggested to MDawg multiple times, here and by PM, that you and he really are so close on this, that the pair of you should JFDI. Make this happen.Quote: ExpectedvalueWe are not agreeing and I am not approving until I see publicly what wizard is recording and agree. I have explicating told him I do not agree at the moment .
I guess neither of you are actually trying to back out and you both ought to just accept that Mike will take what observations he sees fit to determine to his satisfaction that MDawg is 'playing how he says he does'
So, EV.... I urge you, to take Mike's judgement at face value and press forward.
JFDI, the pair/three of you.
DAMMIT!Quote: ExpectedvalueMdawgs continually brute force of trelling me it’s happening has now made my decision. I did. Not agree and have officially notified wizard I do not agree. No funds will be given
OK...... Now awarding a free kick to MDawg......
I'd like to suggest (subject to MDawg and Wizard agreeing) that Wizard returns those BTC to EV and that MDawg and Wizard still meet up and that MDawg throws the cat among the pigeons by demonstrating his baccarat prowess just for the hell of it.
What an anecdote that would make for them both.
There should be some liquidated damages in this situation, like paying the Wizard his $500. and me at least a $1000. for the time wasted. At a minimum he should be banned off the site for a month for withdrawing.
Why ExpectedValue is making an issue out of a non-issue is incredible. I already said, more than once, fine, let the Wizard record however he chooses.
Times it’s proceeding before that happened. I withdrew as we did not agree
.end of story
If you think he is incapable of judging why did you pick him as judge?
And you can't "withdraw" a challenge that has already been accepted and funded. Offer. Acceptance. Consideration. All you may do at this point is attempt to breach.
I listed the way I want it recorded. It was basic and would give away nothing
In order
Hand number
Bet amount
Bet type
Amount won or lost
You wanted to side talk I don’t have time for that and wizard and I spoke ahead of time and until I sent him a message I agreed in full that i would be refunded this was always the case
If MDawg agrees to meet with Wizard and myself I will buy dinner.
I won't show MDawg how to use other people players cards and MDawg will agree not to show me how he plays Baccarat.
I will leave this challenge open until such time as all three of us are simultaneously in Vegas!
And again, I don't care how the Wizard monitors the session for purposes of terms adherence, and deciding if I win or lose, and neither should you. You picked him as judge!
Quote: ExpectedvalueI’m not debating back and forth . I am out
I listed the way I want it recorded. It was basic and would give away nothing
In order
Hand number
Bet amount
Bet type
Amount won or lost
You wanted to side talk I don’t have time for that and wizard and I spoke ahead of time and until I sent him a message I agreed in full that i would be refunded this was always the case
Can Wizard bring a clipboard with some lined notepaper, oh, and a pen? Seems like what EV just mentioned is what's in order. Be prepared for 400+ hands.
You and me both!Quote: MDawgNobody is any longer arguing that the Wizard may not record for his own private records however he sees fit! which is why I am wondering why ExpectedValue is raising the fuss.
Quote: MDawgNobody is any longer arguing that the Wizard may not record for his own private records however he sees fit! which is why I am wondering why ExpectedValue is raising the fuss.
Quote: OnceDearYou and me both!
Perhaps he just thinks I am steamrolling this thing. ALL RIGHTY. I suggest we step back and resolve this non-issue by the end of the day.
Quote: MDawgPerhaps he just thinks I am steamrolling this thing. ALL RIGHTY. I suggest we step back and resolve this non-issue by the end of the day.
It’s quite clear EV’s not for real. Nobody should take him seriously ever again
The terms of the Challenge don't allow for anything other than what is there in black and white. In any case, let's just wait for Wizard to step in and assure everyone that he can handle this, and I hope we'll move on.
I have to get going with the usual daily routine including a planned session.
Quote: WellbushIt’s quite clear EV’s not for real. Nobody should take him seriously ever again
I have not commented on this because not for one millisecond did I ever think it was going to happen. How many pages are there on this, and all for nothing just like I thought it would be.
Hand number
Bet size
Bet ... ie banker player tie
Result
We can then finish it off and agree
Pending wizard posting what he will record
We can then both type agree and it will be done
Quote: ExpectedvalueIf mdawg agrees the result can be recorded as below
Hand number
Bet size
Bet ... ie banker player tie
Result
We can then finish it off and agree
Pending wizard posting what he will record
We can then both type agree and it will be done
Well, this is excellent.... As I understand it, MDawg has already agreed to that here...
JFDI Guys..... C'mon, you know you want to.
Quote: MDawgAnd I have already stated that however the Wizard chooses to monitor is fine with me, as long as all that is disclosed by him is whether terms have been met and whether I win or lose.
Quote: MDawg
And again, I don't care how the Wizard monitors the session for purposes of terms adherence, and deciding if I win or lose, and neither should you. You picked him as judge!
Hand number
Bet amount
Bet type
Win loss amount