The Adventures of MDawg
Excerpts from Session Reports of this week:
Mostly because I had no chips in front of me lower than 1000, I put 7000 on Player and 1000 on tie. Both sides opened with a 3. I drew a four sided nine. Ouch. I was down to 2. I could just see the face card coming, but, incredibly, dealer drew another nine for a 2 – 2 tie – paying me 8000. I leapt out of my seat shouting. That was quite a feeling!
I have not bet more than 500 on a tie bet since the Old Days. In my lifetime I have WON all of the large (1000 or more) tie bets I have placed, but I think I could count all of them on one hand, or maybe on one hand plus another finger or two. It’s a rare event that I will put that much on a tie bet, but somehow, it has always paid off.
Anyway, you can’t really put a price on hitting an 8000 tie. The whole pit lit up, or at least, in my corner everyone did.
At the end of the fourth shoe, the cut card came out in the middle of the last hand. Some casinos declare that the penultimate, some the final, but in general offer the opportunity to bet the tie even after the cards have started to come out, especially if that is considered the last hand of the shoe. I mentioned this (didn’t insist) to the pit boss, that I should have the right to place the tie wager now, but finally just left it alone.
“I would have only bet a hundred anyway.”
Wouldn’t you know it, the tie landed.
“That’s eight hundred you owe me!” I kept joking with the pit boss, after that.
I eventually got within about ten grand of even, and on one bet I put six hundred on bank and tossed a chip on tie. As the cards came out I realized I had tossed a five hundred chip, not a hundred on the tie! I’d never do it that way, I’d always bet a lot more on the hand than on the tie – never a nearly equal amount.
“That’s a mistake.” I declared.
“Good mistake.” the dealer responded.
Okayy. Nothing I could do anyway cards were out.
Sure enough, Tie! Four thousand!
How that dealer was so sure it was a “good” mistake, I’ll never know (probably was just trying to make me feel better), but in any case, that was four grand on the tie!
“We’re even now! You no longer owe me eight hundred!”
The pit boss just laughed and made an even (baseball umpire “Safe!” like criss cross motion with arms).
Now, that's twelve grand in tie payouts for someone who normally bets but a hundred on the tie. Try to tell me they will get that back from me, especially given how I hit the tie far more frequently than 1/8.
bumped up to June 24th, with a VIP Opening that will be earlier than that. MDawg will be there!
Quote: MDawgResorts World Las Vegas announces opening date
bumped up to June 24th, with a VIP Opening that will be earlier than that. MDawg will be there!
You are now gonna have a few troll like individuals on this site, set a trap for you!
Sincerely,
Marcus Clark
Real Person; AKA MarcusClark66
Professional Casino Security Expert
Honorary & Official #1 Fan of the MDawg Adventures Club
FYI I have several new Fan Club applications and I'm trying to process them I'll get around to it soon as I can.
Win more money, stay in touch. :)
Respectfully,
Marcus Clark
Real Person; AKA MarcusClark66
Professional Casino Security Expert
Honorary & Official #1 Fan of the MDawg Adventures Club
Quote: Marcusclark66Hope all is well.
FYI I have several new Fan Club applications and I'm trying to process them I'll get around to it soon as I can.
Win more money, stay in touch. :)
Can’t wait to meet ‘em. There’s a very hot betting market on how many there will be and whether they will all use VPNs.
Quote: unJonCan’t wait to meet ‘em. There’s a very hot betting market on how many there will be and whether they will all use VPNs.
Look for my thread to explain joining the best and most exclusive Fan Club!
Peace Out,
Marcus Clark
Real Person; AKA MarcusClark66
Professional Casino Security Expert
Honorary & Official #1 Fan of the MDawg Adventures Club
Quote: Marcusclark66Look for my thread to explain joining the best and most exclusive Fan Club!
Peace Out,
Marcus Clark
Real Person; AKA MarcusClark66
Professional Casino Security Expert
Honorary & Official #1 Fan of the MDawg Adventures Club
I'm sure plenty of Advantage Players will leap on sending emails and names to a casino surveillance guy.
Well now you have 30 days of free time to process them.Quote: Marcusclark66Hope all is well.
FYI I have several new Fan Club applications and I'm trying to process them I'll get around to it soon as I can.
Pull any more stunts like that and you are gone for good.
FYI this isn't the first time in my life that I have had a Fan Club.
Quote: MDawgIs there something wrong with creating an MDawg Fan Club? What did I miss?
FYI this isn't the first time in my life that I have had a Fan Club.
I don't know, If I join do I get a neato sticker, badge or decoder ring?
Any takers? There's been some very large talk behind my sleeping back, and no error.
Quote: MDawgI will wager any amount of money that MarcusClark66 and WellBush are real live persons who are not I.
Any takers? There's been some very large talk behind my sleeping back, and no error.
No thanks pal.
Quote: MDawgI will wager any amount of money that MarcusClark66 and WellBush are real live persons who are not I.
Any takers? There's been some very large talk behind my sleeping back, and no error.
I'd be willing to bet that you have made another account here besides MDawg. I do not know how to prove it.
Quote: MDawgI will wager any amount of money that MarcusClark66 and WellBush are real live persons who are not I.
Any takers? There's been some very large talk behind my sleeping back, and no error.
I'd be willing to bet that you have made another account here besides MDawg. I do not know how to prove it.
Quote: MDawgIs there something wrong with creating an MDawg Fan Club? What did I miss?
FYI this isn't the first time in my life that I have had a Fan Club.
It is a clear example of trolling the forum. There was no need to start another MDawg based thread. Any fan club discussions could quite comfortably fit in the ‘Adventures’ thread. I believe OnceDear had advised not to start any more similar threads.
Since this is the adventures thread, feel free to tell us about your previous fan clubs.
Quote: MDawgIs there something wrong with creating an MDawg Fan Club? What did I miss?
FYI this isn't the first time in my life that I have had a Fan Club.
To join the fan club Marcus asked members to PM him their names and email addresses.
That is what violated forum rules I am pretty certain.
Enough that the entire thread was removed
Any wonder why life is so much easier just ignoring the balderdash.
I proposed a wager, any takers? Yes or no.
Why some of you WOVs look mad?
Y'all supposed to be happy we're free!
Y'all WOVs look like y'all wanted some of us MDawg supporters to stay in WOV jail.
Are A real live person, most likley. Either way, former member(s), no doubt. Probably one or both is B79. Marcus fits the profile of B79, pretending to be a casino personal with some, I read it on the internet very generic BS, but no real knowledge. Who knows exactly what you guys all got going on, it's clearly a bunch of obvious shenanigans.Quote: MDawgI will wager any amount of money that MarcusClark66 and WellBush are real live persons who are not I.
Any takers? There's been some very large talk behind my sleeping back, and no error.
Quote: MDawgAs far as what I proposed, if someone wants to talk sideways, s/he may keep that to himself/herself, unless there is more to it than just talk.
Any wonder why life is so much easier just ignoring the balderdash.
I proposed a wager, any takers? Yes or no.
Why some of you WOVs look mad?
Y'all supposed to be happy we're free!
Y'all WOVs look like y'all wanted some of us MDawg supporters to stay in WOV jail.
Now let me guess who’s talking sideways, MD? I got certain posters blocked...
Wait...maybe I shouldn’t put names down...they’re a protected species around here. Folks like you and me are open slather, though. Hmm...
He should have been suspended earlier over arguably the cringiest signature ever seen on this forum...Quote: OnceDearWell now you have 30 days of free time to process them.
Pull any more stunts like that and you are gone for good.
Quote: Marcusclark66
Sincerely,
Marcus Clark
Real Person; AKA MarcusClark66
Professional Casino Security Expert
Honorary & Official #1 Fan of the MDawg Adventures Club
Notice that the above paragraph provides a reasoned argument. Do many of the naysayers here do that, or do they just deride without any decent substance? I look forward to quality replies, whether they are for or against the argument.
Quote: WellbushOn to the next part of my correspondence...I'm sure math theory can explain a lot about gambling, but can it explain everything? There are games that ebb and flow. Sometimes streaks favour the dealer, sometimes they favour the player. What if a player can withdraw from the game, or lower the bets, when it goes against s/he? What if a player can raise the stakes when it's favourable to do so? Do statistical analyses account for these variations? I don't have the answer but some here may. I think it's worth considering and may explain why a small minority of gamblers could win.
Notice that the above paragraph provides a reasoned argument. Do many of the naysayers here do that, or do they just deride without any decent substance? I look forward to quality replies, whether they are for or against the argument.
This sounds very, very much like the system I use.
Monday through Friday, I ask God for help in reading the ebb and flow of cards. I almost always win.
On Sunday, which God takes off, I ask Lucifer to provide me with insight on reading the ebb and flow. I win even more on Sunday. I'm not sure that means I'm in better touch with Lucifer or that Lucifer is more sympathetic to itinerant sinners such as myself or if God just gets tired from helping five weekdays each week. But for whatever reason, Sundays are my best.
I have some real issues on Saturday, however. I can't read the ebb and flow of cards at all. My friend, Mr. Bohorad, explained that it might be because it's a Jewish day of rest, and therefore neither God nor Lucifer feel they should be helping anyone. This brings up the question, of course, of whether God or Lucifer are each Jewish or whether they respect the Jewish Sabbath more than other days.
I've done statistical analyses comparable to those done by Mr. Wellbush above, and it's clear Sunday is my big day and Saturday is my worst. If anyone has a reasoned alternative explanation, please chime in.
My conclusion was to take Saturdays off, as reading ebb and flow is almost impossible. I'm considering converting to Judaism, as that would dovetail with my gambling systems nicely.
Quote: WellbushWhat if a player can withdraw from the game, or lower the bets, when it goes against s/he?
He/She can indeed withdraw or lower bets just before a losing streak and he/she COULD ramp up bets and press heavily into a winning streak! He/she could then win more than you or I with our pathetic flat betting.
What he/she cannot do is know before any wager if the streak is indeed going to happen, or if he/she is withdrawing or ramping up at EXACTLY the wrong time. It's no different than if the player took a life changing stake to the table and placed ONE wager of the entire bankroll just when he/she believed it would be a winning hand. He/she WOULD definitely either win/lose or tie. The nature of the intuition/prayer/superstition would not change the maths, nor the outcome.
Yes. Of course. Statistical analyses indicate reliably that a set of wagers will have some set of winners and losers sat at various points on a probability distribution. Neither the maths, nor Hocus Pocus can tell the statistician or the prospective gambler, who will occupy what position on the chart. Only the relative population density.Quote:
What if a player can raise the stakes when it's favourable to do so? Do statistical analyses account for these variations?
You can think the moon is made of blue cheese, or that you or someone else is a successful gambler. Neither hocus pocus, nor maths makes it true, nor indeed false. It either is, or it isn't. It probably isn't, regardless.Quote:I think it's worth considering and may explain why a small minority of gamblers could win.
I think not. Your paragraph poses a question and makes no argument that I can see.Quote:Notice that the above paragraph provides a reasoned argument.
In the absence of evidence that you or anyone has precognition, we naysayers can just shrug and say Meh!.Quote:Do many of the naysayers here do that, or do they just deride without any decent substance? I look forward to quality replies, whether they are for or against the argument.
Quote: OnceDearHe/She can indeed withdraw or lower bets just before a losing streak and he/she COULD ramp up bets and press heavily into a winning streak! He/she could then win more than you or I with our pathetic flat betting.
What he/she cannot do is know before any wager if the streak is indeed going to happen, or if he/she is withdrawing or ramping up at EXACTLY the wrong time. It's no different than if the player took a life changing stake to the table and placed ONE wager of the entire bankroll just when he/she believed it would be a winning hand. He/she WOULD definitely either win/lose or tie. The nature of the intuition/prayer/superstition would not change the maths, nor the outcome.
Yes. Of course. Statistical analyses indicate reliably that a set of wagers will have some set of winners and losers sat at various points on a probability distribution. Hocus Pocus cannot tell the statistician or the prospective gambler, who will occupy what position on the chart.
You can think the moon is made of blue cheese, or that you or someone else is a successful gambler. Neither hocus pocus, nor maths makes it true, nor indeed false. It either is, or it isn't. It probably isn't, regardless.
I think not. Your paragraph poses a question and makes no argument that I can see.In the absence of evidence that you or anyone has precognition, we naysayers can just shrug and say Meh!.
When you give Wellbush a reasonable answer he then says he is blocking you.
The truth hurts
Quote: WellbushOn to the next part of my correspondence...I'm sure math theory can explain a lot about gambling, but can it explain everything? There are games that ebb and flow. Sometimes streaks favour the dealer, sometimes they favour the player. What if a player can withdraw from the game, or lower the bets, when it goes against s/he? What if a player can raise the stakes when it's favourable to do so? Do statistical analyses account for these variations? I don't have the answer but some here may. I think it's worth considering and may explain why a small minority of gamblers could win.
Notice that the above paragraph provides a reasoned argument. Do many of the naysayers here do that, or do they just deride without any decent substance? I look forward to quality replies, whether they are for or against the argument.
The first paragraph that you wrote is worthless. You think that you provided a reasoned argument, that could not be further from the truth. Wellbush, you lack understanding on the issue. Those people who think as you do are believing in false hopes and dreams. No one can predict when a trend "streak" starts or when it ends period.
In Stanford Wong's great book titled Professional Blackjack, he wrote on pages 240/241 tells about authors who say you can make money on streakiness but never provide evidence to support the claims. On page 241 is table 94 showing the outcomes versus results of the previous two hands regarding a 20 million hands study. here are the results after the player had these outcomes of the previous two hands.
"previous two hands: outcomes of the next hand
win lose push
win, win .432 .478 .089
win, lose
win, push
lose, win
lose, lose " all nine categories choices results were identical with the win, win result"
lose, push
push, win
push, lose
push, push "
Wong, said it best right here:
"Trying to bet more when you are winning or less when you are losing is an exercise in futility;"
The above example applies to all forms of gaming. Meaning :
"Streaks occur, but they cannot be predicted."
I will finish with a plug for Stanford Wong's books. Yes, they are old but are loaded with valuable information, as well as stand the test of time.
Quote: OnceDearHe/She can indeed withdraw or lower bets just before a losing streak and he/she COULD ramp up bets and press heavily into a winning streak! He/she could then win more than you or I with our pathetic flat betting.
What he/she cannot do is know before any wager if the streak is indeed going to happen, or if he/she is withdrawing or ramping up at EXACTLY the wrong time. It's no different than if the player took a life changing stake to the table and placed ONE wager of the entire bankroll just when he/she believed it would be a winning hand. He/she WOULD definitely either win/lose or tie. The nature of the intuition/prayer/superstition would not change the maths, nor the outcome.
Yes. Of course. Statistical analyses indicate reliably that a set of wagers will have some set of winners and losers sat at various points on a probability distribution. Neither the maths, nor Hocus Pocus can tell the statistician or the prospective gambler, who will occupy what position on the chart. Only the relative population density.
You can think the moon is made of blue cheese, or that you or someone else is a successful gambler. Neither hocus pocus, nor maths makes it true, nor indeed false. It either is, or it isn't. It probably isn't, regardless.
I think not. Your paragraph poses a question and makes no argument that I can see.In the absence of evidence that you or anyone has precognition, we naysayers can just shrug and say Meh!.
Fair enough. A decent reply.
Quote: OnceDearHe/She can indeed withdraw or lower bets just before a losing streak and he/she COULD ramp up bets and press heavily into a winning streak! He/she could then win more than you or I with our pathetic flat betting.
What he/she cannot do is know before any wager if the streak is indeed going to happen, or if he/she is withdrawing or ramping up at EXACTLY the wrong time. It's no different than if the player took a life changing stake to the table and placed ONE wager of the entire bankroll just when he/she believed it would be a winning hand. He/she WOULD definitely either win/lose or tie. The nature of the intuition/prayer/superstition would not change the maths, nor the outcome.
Yes. Of course. Statistical analyses indicate reliably that a set of wagers will have some set of winners and losers sat at various points on a probability distribution. Neither the maths, nor Hocus Pocus can tell the statistician or the prospective gambler, who will occupy what position on the chart. Only the relative population density.
You can think the moon is made of blue cheese, or that you or someone else is a successful gambler. Neither hocus pocus, nor maths makes it true, nor indeed false. It either is, or it isn't. It probably isn't, regardless.
I think not. Your paragraph poses a question and makes no argument that I can see.In the absence of evidence that you or anyone has precognition, we naysayers can just shrug and say Meh!.
I have had a little time to review your answers, OD. I’m sorry to say, but it seems your answers DO NOT debunk my argument, AND, your stated stance misses my argument when you say my argument is just a question.
I have a BA(Psychology). May I ask what your qualification is?
To use a simplistic analogy of your stated reply, I get that you are saying 1 + 1 = 2. That does not mean that 2 is not between 1.8 and 2.2.
Believe it or not, the underlying constructs of Psychology, are Math and Science. Whilst a qualification in Psychology doesn’t come close to the mathematical knowledge of a qualification in math, it is sufficient to understand relatively basic mathematical argument.
I am writing this on the fly so I’ll have to leave it here for now. Rest assured, there is more to come.
B.Sc Physics with Electronics, with a good module in statistics and probability, FWIW.Quote: WellbushI have a BA(Psychology). May I ask what your qualification is?
It is at a precise location between 1.8 and 2.2. Knowing that a number falls in a range like that is LESS information than knowing it's exact value. So I see no value in that assertion.Quote:To use a simplistic analogy of your stated reply, I get that you are saying 1 + 1 = 2. That does not mean that 2 is not between 1.8 and 2.2.
Analogy: I can throw a single six sided die and predict the outcome.
Prediction: 'It will come up between 1 and 6' : 100% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. I get paid fair odds and get paid back 1x my wager every time. Never get rich, never get broke.
Prediction: 'It will come up 1, 2, or 3' : 50% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. Not exactly helpful. I get paid fair odds and either double or lose my stake. Might get richer, or broke.
Prediction: 'It will come up 1 or 2' : 33.33% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. Not exactly helpful. I get paid fair odds and either triple or lose my stake.
Prediction: 'It will come up 1' : 16.67% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. Not exactly helpful. I get paid fair odds and either sextuple or lose my stake.
Note in the latter cases, I have a probability of significantly increasing my bankroll. The increase in bankroll is enormous at 6 fold if I get the exact result. But the probability of success is 1/6, so.....
Without some extra information, all the above strategies have exactly the same expected value. All are equally worthless except that in some cases you can Never come out ahead and in some cases you can come out a bit ahead and in some cases you can come out a lot ahead... with increasing probability of coming away broke.
"There is more to come", is there?
'Meh!'
Enough of a thread hijack, Wellbush. If you wish to continue trying to debate whatever this is, maybe take it back to that other thread you started.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/35751-beat-the-house-at-blackjack/18/#post801113
Quote: OnceDearI see no argument to debunk.
B.Sc Physics with Electronics, with a good module in statistics and probability, FWIW.It is at a precise location between 1.8 and 2.2. Knowing that a number falls in a range like that is LESS information than knowing it's exact value. So I see no value in that assertion.
Analogy: I can throw a single six sided die and predict the outcome.
Prediction: 'It will come up between 1 and 6' : 100% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. I get paid fair odds and get paid back 1x my wager every time. Never get rich, never get broke.
Prediction: 'It will come up 1, 2, or 3' : 50% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. Not exactly helpful. I get paid fair odds and either double or lose my stake. Might get richer, or broke.
Prediction: 'It will come up 1 or 2' : 33.33% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. Not exactly helpful. I get paid fair odds and either triple or lose my stake.
Prediction: 'It will come up 1' : 16.67% success rate. Whoopdy Doo. Not exactly helpful. I get paid fair odds and either sextuple or lose my stake.
Note in the latter cases, I have a probability of significantly increasing my bankroll. The increase in bankroll is enormous at 6 fold if I get the exact result. But the probability of success is 1/6, so.....
Without some extra information, all the above strategies have exactly the same expected value. All are equally worthless except that in some cases you can Never come out ahead and in some cases you can come out a bit ahead and in some cases you can come out a lot ahead... with increasing probability of coming away broke.
"There is more to come", is there?
'Meh!'
Enough of a thread hijack, Wellbush. If you wish to continue trying to debate whatever this is, maybe take it back to that other thread you started.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/35751-beat-the-house-at-blackjack/18/#post801113
I could reply to your post, but it seems I’m only worthy of “Meh!” In that case I’ll take my genuine enquiry elsewhere
Quote: WellbushOn to the next part of my correspondence...I'm sure math theory can explain a lot about gambling, but can it explain everything? There are games that ebb and flow. Sometimes streaks favour the dealer, sometimes they favour the player. What if a player can withdraw from the game, or lower the bets, when it goes against s/he? What if a player can raise the stakes when it's favourable to do so? Do statistical analyses account for these variations? I don't have the answer but some here may. I think it's worth considering and may explain why a small minority of gamblers could win.
OD says he sees no argument. Well let me see if I can explain the above argument more explicitly:
BJ is a game whereby streaks occur. Sometimes the streaks favour the dealer, sometimes they favour the player. If the player follows a strategy that takes advantage of this fact, s/he may be able to win consistently. Some strategies the player can use to take advantage in BJ, is using the Fibonacci betting sequence, combined with taking breaks away from the table. The player would take breaks when he experiences a number of losing bets, and rejoin the table at a different time.
This is a strategy that prevents long losing streaks. The Fibonacci sequence works in the player's favour for shorter losing streaks. My argument is that the combination of both strategies may allow a player to overcome the house edge.
The historical statistical analyses that have been used for the game of BJ, may not cover the two variables I've described - using the Fibonacci sequence with breaks during losing streaks.
OD's endless use of mathematical hoohah, does not answer my argument herein. Maybe his logical mind is too restrictive to understand this?
Quote: Wellbush
I could reply to your post, but it seems I’m only worthy of “Meh!” In that case I’ll take my genuine enquiry elsewhere
There's nothing genuine about your inquiry or you.
1. The challenge has already occurred and Wiz/MDawg have not reported results to us yet
2. The challenge has not yet occurred because Wiz has been unavailable on times MDawg has offered
3. The challenge has not occurred because MDawg has not offered specifics to the Wiz
4. The challenge has not occurred but MDawg and Wiz have a specific date and place set.
5. The challenge will never occur because MDawg never intended for it to occur.
Hopefully Wiz can weigh in and the answer is either 1 or 4.
Quote: WellbushOn to the next part of my correspondence...I'm sure math theory can explain a lot about gambling, but can it explain everything? There are games that ebb and flow. Sometimes streaks favour the dealer, sometimes they favour the player. What if a player can withdraw from the game, or lower the bets, when it goes against s/he? What if a player can raise the stakes when it's favourable to do so? Do statistical analyses account for these variations? I don't have the answer but some here may. I think it's worth considering and may explain why a small minority of gamblers could win.
Notice that the above paragraph provides a reasoned argument. Do many of the naysayers here do that, or do they just deride without any decent substance? I look forward to quality replies, whether they are for or against the argument.
The first paragraph is not a "reasoned argument" in any way. It is just a list of questions that you admit you do not have the answers for. A list of unanswered questions is not an argument. So I will go ahead and give you the answers.
-"math theory" does not explain every single thing about gambling. However, it does answer your follow up questions
-If a player only bet when the odds were in their favor and they were likely to win; and either bet small or zero when the odds were against them and likely to lose, "math theory" proves that they would win money over time.
That is what MDawg does and it is why his strategy would be worth over eight to nine figures per year to anyone who wanted to maximize the profits from that type of betting. But that actually does very little to truly explain why MDawg (and the small minority) do win. We would need to establish how he can identify when to put more money on certain bets, and when to bet less. How does he know when the probability of certain bets has changed? It has been clear for a few years now that he will never answer that, which is why his adventure stories are repetitive and offer so little value to the reader. The stories have even served to take away value from the entire forum. They often make me think of five-year-olds watching Power Rangers. They like it because it is nearly the same exact story, with the same exact action every single time. It is only because of this type of side commentary that there is anything worthwhile.
Quote: WellbushOn to the next part of my correspondence...I'm sure math theory can explain a lot about gambling, but can it explain everything? There are games that ebb and flow. Sometimes streaks favour the dealer, sometimes they favour the player. What if a player can withdraw from the game, or lower the bets, when it goes against s/he? What if a player can raise the stakes when it's favourable to do so? Do statistical analyses account for these variations? I don't have the answer but some here may. I think it's worth considering and may explain why a small minority of gamblers could win.
Notice that the above paragraph provides a reasoned argument. Do many of the naysayers here do that, or do they just deride without any decent substance? I look forward to quality replies, whether they are for or against the argument.
The first paragraph is not a "reasoned argument" in any way. It is just a list of questions that you admit you do not have the answers for. A list of unanswered questions is not an argument. So I will go ahead and give you the answers.
-"math theory" does not explain every single thing about gambling. However, it does answer your follow up questions
-If a player only bet when the odds were in their favor and they were likely to win; and either bet small or zero when the odds were against them and likely to lose, "math theory" proves that they would win money over time.
That is what MDawg does and it is why his strategy would be worth over eight to nine figures per year to anyone who wanted to maximize the profits from that type of betting. But that actually does very little to truly explain why MDawg (and the small minority) do win. We would need to establish how he can identify when to put more money on certain bets, and when to bet less. How does he know when the probability of certain bets has changed? It has been clear for a few years now that he will never answer that, which is why his adventure stories are repetitive and offer so little value to the reader. The stories have even served to take away value from the entire forum. They often make me think of five-year-olds watching Power Rangers. They like it because it is nearly the same exact story, with the same exact action every single time. It is only because of this type of side commentary that there is anything worthwhile.
Quote: TomGThe first paragraph is not a "reasoned argument" in any way. It is just a list of questions that you admit you do not have the answers for. A list of unanswered questions is not an argument. So I will go ahead and give you the answers.
-"math theory" does not explain every single thing about gambling. However, it does answer your follow up questions
-If a player only bet when the odds were in their favor and they were likely to win; and either bet small or zero when the odds were against them and likely to lose, "math theory" proves that they would win money over time.
That is what MDawg does and it is why his strategy would be worth over eight to nine figures per year to anyone who wanted to maximize the profits from that type of betting. But that actually does very little to truly explain why MDawg (and the small minority) do win. We would need to establish how he can identify when to put more money on certain bets, and when to bet less. How does he know when the probability of certain bets has changed? It has been clear for a few years now that he will never answer that, which is why his adventure stories are repetitive and offer so little value to the reader. The stories have even served to take away value from the entire forum. They often make me think of five-year-olds watching Power Rangers. They like it because it is nearly the same exact story, with the same exact action every single time. It is only because of this type of side commentary that there is anything worthwhile.
Thanks TomG. Your reply is very interesting. I think your reply hints that OD's, and many other detractor's replies, are inadequate. Before I expand, I will wait for OD to confirm if he is okay for me to continue on this thread, or not? Stay tuned...
As far as Wellbush's input, he is tuning it to the issue of MDawg's Baccarat play so I see it as on topic. Plus it adds something to the discussion in that it expands on his thinking versus the ignored ones who occasionally just chirp in with the same exact tiredness, thankfully generally limited to fifty words or less. 😁
I think that was what I said. I see no argument, reasoned or otherwise.Quote: TomGThe first paragraph is not a "reasoned argument" in any way. It is just a list of questions that you admit you do not have the answers for. A list of unanswered questions is not an argument.
That is what MDawg claims to do. and that is what some 'naysayers' disbelieve. Maybe someone with a psychology degree could analyse that situation for us, rather than trying to tackle statistics or maths.Quote: TomGThat is what MDawg does and it is why his strategy would be worth over eight to nine figures per year to anyone...
Quote: TomGBut that actually does very little to truly explain why MDawg (and the small minority) do win.
Easier to explain why he would claim to always win than how he would actually always win.
Or a smaller task...Quote: TomGWe would need to establish how he can identify when to put more money on certain bets, and when to bet less. How does he know when the probability of certain bets has changed?
He would need to establish THAT he can identify when to put more money on certain bets, and when to bet less. Does he know when the probability of certain bets has changed?
Quote: TomG... he will never answer that, which is why his adventure stories are repetitive and offer so little value to the reader. The stories have even served to take away value from the entire forum. They often make me think of five-year-olds watching Power Rangers. They like it because it is nearly the same exact story, with the same exact action every single time. It is only because of this type of side commentary that there is anything worthwhile.
I like that comment, FWIW
Quote: Wellbush
Now this post has some interesting parts to it, and these parts are found scattered throughout this website. I think Mission146 has hinted at it, and Mission146 may even have some more knowledge to share on the topic. So what am I referring to?
Well, I'm referring to a few things and I'll start with being in the money. Players get in the money a lot, and probably get out of the money much more. Does this tell us something? Well, maybe it does. Maybe it tells us that games go through cycles. That there are times that games favour the player, and times when games favour the dealer. So, isn't it sound logic for a player to take profits when their sitting on a nice profit? And isn't it sound logic for a player to continue gambling until the game cycle turns against them?
There's more to cover but I'll leave this post for now, to allow for discussion.
Barring some form of advantage play, not playing Baccarat whatsoever is the soundest logic.
Quote: MDawgThese gentlemen should have stuck to brunettes....
Woman accused of stealing watches valued at $82K from men on Strip
I mentioned this incident I read about in the LV Review Journal to my wife.
“Well, she must have let them have their way with her first, before she robbed them.”
“What makes you think that?”
“Well, they had fun, they were relaxed, they went to sleep, and she went to work.”
Hmm.
In any case, if you haven’t had a hooker steal or try to steal your Rolex, then you haven’t truly high rolled in Vegas.
I usually try to save money by only engaging in sexual congress with women who don't expect me to pay them.
Actually, I always try to save money that way.
You'll forgive me for being rude, but she (in the picture) would have to pay me.
Quote: MDawgThese gentlemen should have stuck to brunettes....
Woman accused of stealing watches valued at $82K from men on Strip
I mentioned this incident I read about in the LV Review Journal to my wife.
“Well, she must have let them have their way with her first, before she robbed them.”
“What makes you think that?”
“Well, they had fun, they were relaxed, they went to sleep, and she went to work.”
Hmm.
In any case, if you haven’t had a hooker steal or try to steal your Rolex, then you haven’t truly high rolled in Vegas.
Personally, I think she's alright, and I've posted the picture again coz I think it improves the thread. Her lips look like the well-used type.
And then later tonight will be posted, the Session Report from the MDawg Challenge courtesy of DarkOz, once that Session Report has been approved in its entirety by the Wizard. This session occurred at some point during the past ten days.
My slot machine in the suite rang 777 so I was expecting great things today, and great they were. Pulled the usual 8K marker, then played along got ahead about 3K on the first shoe. Second shoe I hit a rough patch and got down to a case bet of 6500 which I hit, bringing me to +5000. From there, for the next two shoes it was all gravy including the final shoe where I was plastering side by side mostly Player runs, pressing into them and putting red chips (up to $30.) for the dealer too. Hit a few ties too, for 100 – 120 (x 8) each.
As I was ploughing through the runs the entire serving staff stood behind me watching and the dealer next door declared, “You’re on fire!”
I wish I had realized it too, because then I would have ended up with more like +80K instead of the +16K I took from the table.
I arrived towards the end of a shoe already played out where the Bank had never gone more than two. I picked up on that instantly, and bet Player – but, not for nearly enough, only 700 or so each time. This pattern never shifted – Bank never passed two. Never. I ended that partial shoe a few grand ahead.
Second shoe I probably got up to about five thousand ahead, but not more. Kept getting stuck. A player came in with a five thousand chip, broke it down, and played that until he finally lost it, then broke down a twenty-five thousand dollar chip. I did a case bet for 5000 on Player and won, but slowly went back down the tubes after that. I lost my entire 8K marker I had pulled, and then did a call bet for 2000 on Player and took that 2000, over the course of the next several hands, to first 8000, and eventually over the course of the next two shoes, to as much as 12000.
Along the way, another player, who admitted to me after I asked him, that he was Martingaling on Player only, came in. This youngster was funny. Inebriated and always wanting to knock knuckles with me whenever we won on the same hand. Kid kept leaving the table to go do sports bets, or collect on sports bets tickets, or some such, and came back complaining about how he had lost or been shut out, and that had to play catch up. Finally, declared that was now even, and quit.
I got back to even, and then negative, and then plus, more than a few times, and finally quit – at 3900 ahead. The best run I caught all day I won something like 7/8 hands in a row, but was betting only a flat 1000 per hand, and was coming back from behind anyway.
At the end the pit boss said he had me down for about four shoes, which was fine, and “about a 1000” average bet.
“How about 1100?”
“Why would I want to do that?”
What a response? What an a-hole?
“Because I take care of your dealers?”
Had to gall to come back with something to the effect of, So what, that doesn’t help me.
I was almost going to say, “Well what do you want, a happy handshake?” but I just let it go. So that’s two less than stellar pit bosses over the last week.
I walked with +3900. The other Player at my table wanted to meet me to play tomorrow.
“We win together, my friend.”
I let the player know when I might be back, but…we shall see. I prefer to play alone.
