The Adventures of MDawg
Quote: WellbushI'm sure I'll eventually get around to looking at it OD. Thanks for the post. MD now wants me to continue on my old thread for these kinda topics. I'm sure I'll eventually reply to this post over there. Cheers
My guess is that even MDawg has his limits of reading about Wellbush's wisdom.
Quote: darkozThat would leave only the outcome that the Wizard upon viewing MDawg in action is easily fooled.
I don't think so.
If true we probably have wasted a decade on the forum of one the premier minds of gambling mathematics.
More probable is that MDawg's ego built up over 400 pages of intense interest combined with his being outside the bubble of the AP community has led to a misstep.
He probably doesn't realize the cogs turning right now.
PM's and phone calls in private.
THERE WILL NOT BE 400 FURTHER PAGES OF DISCUSSION ON HOW HE DOES IT. THAT'S GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES!
There are AP's who have connections at casinos. Hosts who actively help with information for a price. And even innocently just talk too much, quick to give away half the casinos secrets without knowing it.
AP's know where the open spigots of information are to be mined.
MDawg might as well change his name to BitDawg because he is going to be mined!
In other words, you had Shackleford partake in the “challenge” not to reveal said advantage play but merely to confirm MD is an advantage player, period.
That confirmation was needed before aforementioned play can be deciphered (never to be revealed by Shackleford). So you bet $2,000 (that was paid to MD regardless of him winning or losing the “challenge”) that the play existed. Now that you are satisfied it does exist, you will not only recoup the $2,000 but you might possibly have a new revenue stream beyond that (via MD’s advantage play).
Quote: WellbushIf you think it's game, set, match before I have a chance to view and reply to the info, good luck. I'm not so presumptuous
Please.
You’re bringing knives to a gunfight.
Resistance is futile...
Quote: Mission146Quote: WizardI did not want to post this before the challenge, but here is how I would have played it.
- Make 56 $200 bets on the Banker and one $205 bet on the Player. The one $205 on Player to comply with the rule against flat betting and not always betting the same way.
- If I'm up after step 1, quit.
- If I'm not up after step 1, go into a Martingale until I'm up or lose the full $8,000.
I estimate my probability of success at 98%.
That's a good play, but in the first iteration of the challenge, that's why I suggested that betting on both Banker/Player simultaneously should absolutely not be permitted.
As I understand it, MDawg was not limited to just that one $8,000 marker. I think my strategy would have been to just open with a five-step Marty with a 1k base and then flat bet with only slight variation in my bet amounts if I have won a few. Basically hope to just chop near 50/50 without ever getting down, and if down, revert back to the Martingale again.
I estimate my probability of success to be about 94%.
Yes, seems your response is similar to Wiz's, a theoretical math one. I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with it. I'm sure it is very applicable, too. Hats off to MD who stuck to his word and played the way he normally plays, and won.
Quote: WizardYes, he absolutely did. I'd like to state I gave him no advice before the challenge.
I agree.
So are you able to say, without breaking your confidentiality agreement, that you believe mdawg is playing baccarat at an advantage?
I think that is what you are saying, I just would like confirmation if possible.
Quote: BoSoxThat short session that the Wizard observed proved absolutely nothing. If anything it proved just how worthless MDawg's system really is, where he would possibly jeopardize a one and only lifetime secret for 2k. I do not believe any of the BS.
The session itself proves nothing.
However Wiz saying he has additional information (albeit confidential) that MD is legitimately playing at an advantage is a significant development.
Quote: darkozPlenty of posters have criticized my "generosity" but without knowing there was a truly advantageous move in play they probably wouldn't put time or effort into uncovering it.
The obfuscation of flowery trip reports and hocus pocus suggestions have been eliminated.
MDawg is for real!!!
For those who feel he generated an easy two grand I don't think they have the full import of the situation.
Every AP of a certain magnitude is at this very moment working on the solution as quietly as they can.
I don't doubt that Axel for all his hollering a page ago wasn't being disingenuous. He was more angry I suspect that he wasn't deciphering the play all this time than at MDawg for the actual deception.
The AP community talks and communicates when necessary. Multiple minds will figure out MDawg's move. I guarantee it's just a matter of time.
$2500 was probably a discount all things considered
If all of this ends up being true, than anyone saying you got ripped off at $2,500 is nutso.
Quote: WellbushGame, set, match.
If you think it's game, set, match before I have a chance to view and reply to the info, good luck. I'm not so presumptuous
No luck left. MDawg used it all up.
Quote: Mission146There is a mathematical explanation and Wizard has been informed as to what it is. He just can't say. A loss rebate, if the case, would be one component of said explanation.
If math can explain MD's wins, I have no argument, and never have. My rebuffs are only inquiries/clarifications/questions/etc. I may be unconvinced and disagree with some things, but I don't dispute anything that can clearly be explained by math. Sorry 😁
Quote: darkozWhat surprises me is there currently isn't a conversation now
where all the 400 pages of details from trip reports aren't analyzed
to search for how he does it.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Nobody bothered to search for how he does it before this challenge,
and so few even acknowledged that he could have done it.
The hate got in the way.
Quote: Mission146There is a mathematical explanation
and Wizard has been informed as to what it is.
How could a loss rebate explain how MDawg won $5K
for the shoe that Wizard witnessed?
MDawg explained what happened in his challenge report,
it was exactly the same as every other report he has posted,
he pressed into the streaks.
He didn't need to predict when the streaks begin or end...read the reports.
Quote: BoSoxI definitely call into question his neutral objectivity
in the matter from a business point of view.
This is the latest theme among many of the haters,
that the Wizard lied for an extra $750.
Quote: coachbellyThis is the latest theme among many of the haters,
that the Wizard lied for an extra $750.
What, do you make up stuff out of thin air?
Quote: coachbellyHow could a loss rebate explain how MDawg won $5K
for the shoe that Wizard witnessed?
MDawg explained what happened in his challenge report,
it was exactly the same as every other report he has posted,
he pressed into the streaks.
He didn't need to predict when the streaks begin or end...read the reports.
Some may think there are many flaring, arrogant nostrils on this website, CB, whenever the theoretical math head's views are questioned. Some will not even wait for a reply, they're so insulted by mere questioning. Unfortunately it's just the way it is here. I'm glad there's a block function.
Quote: mwalz9and he just brags about his wins and never about his losses!
You must have missed that I offered a half million dollar bounty to AxelWolf to locate any casino I have played at, at which I have not posted the actual logged in videos of the WIN statements. I even offered to transfer the entire half million in bitcoin, up front, to the Wizard. And logically speaking, from 2018 - 2020, I posted every single session from every single casino I played at and mentioned each casino by name, then posted the WIN statements at the end of each year for every casino I ever mentioned. Assuming I omitted a casino from mention, how did I know in advance that I would lose at such and such casino, and to omit it from mention during the course of the year? If I am that _____ as to know in advance which casinos I will lose at by year's end, and know up front not to mention any play at them during the course of the year, why wouldn't I just avoid such casinos in the first place?
Starting in 2021, I was advised to stop mentioning any casinos by name and will no longer.
Anyway, at this point, what's done is done. What good may come from association with Naysayers and Admitted Losers at casinos. All I may revert to is what I said from Day One - if I didn't come home a winner from these trips wouldn't bother to go to Vegas at all. No, I'm not doing this for a living but at the same time what fun is there in losing? None that I may see.
No further response to this one, as all he seems to do is repeat the same story about how he lost at a casino and therefore everyone else must be a casino loser too. Goodbye!
There were two Wagers actually, both left open until the end of March 2021.
250K Wager
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/off-topic/35670-challenge-to-axelwolf-the-daddy-of-all-wagers/#post796763
500K wager
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/off-topic/35670-challenge-to-axelwolf-the-daddy-of-all-wagers/12/#post797552
I've been back on the forum for 2 whole weeks and already blocked by MDawg.
What will I ever do now?
The dude is a fraud and I don't care what anyone thinks. I know math. I know casino games. I know there is no way possible he is doing it without cheating or doing something edgy.
One winning session means NOTHING to me!
Quote: WellbushBefore your posts, MD and I had already agreed that I would now continue on my old thread "Beat the House at Blackjack!!!!" So for topics like this, I'll only be responding over there. I'm sure I'll let you know when I respond.
You said you're done responding on this thread yet you continue to respond.
You say you've been communicating with your buddy about what posts you should or should not participate in.
Huh?
That smells like a pile or week old fish: why would two people on opposite sides of the world communicate, conspire and agree as to when each should or should not respond to / on a thread?
Is he Gepetto to your Pinocchio?
Quote: mwalz9Is it possible to not like a guy you've never met?
Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish, I wish he'd go away...
I never said I was gonna stop posting here. I said I was gonna stop posting about the topic of winning gamblers here. Huh, it's tiring when posters don't get it, read it, xxxx it. Oh, yeh, we're conspiring on opposite sides of the planet. Um, I get ya....huh???
Quote: mwalz9Is it possible to not like a guy you've never met?
I dunno. Go ask Mum!
Oh, sorry, was this a dating question?
It's kinda off topic!!
Quote: WellbushYeh, ya put ya money where ya mouth is, MD. What can I say about posters who simply refuse to see the light?
Who is the biggest icon from the country that you come from?
My guess is Mick Dundee!
Quote: mwalz9Is it possible to not like a guy you've never met?
Absolutely. If by ‘met’ you mean only in person.
My only problem with the MDawg claims of his wins are the ‘explanations’ of how he won. That there was ‘no way’ to lose because of the player run, or obvious chop pattern, or banker run.....
If he just said.. I win at baccarat but can’t tell you how.... that would at least be plausible..
Hole carding..... (if you know first player card is 8 or 9 big advantage on player, if not advantage to banker).
Similar edge sorting. Clumping. Marked cards. Plus who knows?
Anyway..... I love MDawg’s reports. I am so happy he is actually a big time gambler, and stock guy.
Quote: darkozPlenty of posters have criticized my "generosity" but without knowing there was a truly advantageous move in play they probably wouldn't put time or effort into uncovering it.
The obfuscation of flowery trip reports and hocus pocus suggestions have been eliminated.
MDawg is for real!!!
For those who feel he generated an easy two grand I don't think they have the full import of the situation.
Every AP of a certain magnitude is at this very moment working on the solution as quietly as they can.
I don't doubt that Axel for all his hollering a page ago wasn't being disingenuous. He was more angry I suspect that he wasn't deciphering the play all this time than at MDawg for the actual deception.
The AP community talks and communicates when necessary. Multiple minds will figure out MDawg's move. I guarantee it's just a matter of time.
Found a pic of DarkOz going through Mdawgs post history
Quote: gamerfreakFound a pic of DarkOz going through Mdawgs post history
I've been doxxed! :)
Quote: WellbushQuote:Game, set, match.
If you think it's game, set, match before I have a chance to view and reply to the info, good luck. I'm not so presumptuous
Well...there was that Patriots-Falcons Super Bowl, I guess.
Quote: FTBPlease.
You’re bringing knives to a gunfight.
Resistance is futile...
Oh, and you also know I'm a TNG fan! If not, then you know now.
Quote: WellbushI didn't know you had such a streak, MV. Sorry, you're now.......BLOCKED!! 😁I never said I was gonna stop posting here. I said I was gonna stop posting about the topic of winning gamblers here. Huh, it's tiring when posters don't get it, read it, xxxx it. Oh, yeh, we're conspiring on opposite sides of the planet. Um, I get ya....huh???
You posted:
"Before your posts, MD and I had already agreed that I would now continue on my old thread "Beat the House at Blackjack!!!!" So for topics like this, I'll only be responding over there"
Perhaps it's your garbled use of the English language that led me to conclude that you'd only reply elsewhere as to ANY of the topics Mission had raised in his prior posts; he certainly questioned the veracity of your mentor's claims previously.
Quote: WellbushIf math can explain MD's wins, I have no argument, and never have. My rebuffs are only inquiries/clarifications/questions/etc. I may be unconvinced and disagree with some things, but I don't dispute anything that can clearly be explained by math. Sorry 😁
I can explain no fewer than five different ways that one could win at Baccarat.
Actually, probably closer to ten.
All of them relate back to math, in one way or another. Everything in gambling relates back to math.
Even certain concepts that might not specifically be mathematically quantified, such as why a bet on the spread on one team as opposed to another is perceived by a handicapper to be advantageous, eventually come back to math. Specifically, the handicapper ends up with a large enough sample size for picks that he has made and determines whether or not he's getting enough of them right to overcome the vig.
In fact, anything that you could possibly describe in gambling---provided that you did it with enough specificity, I could break down with math. It's like your, "Leave a losing streak and come back later," thing...the player might have taken a few hours off, but math didn't, and math will still be there waiting for him when he gets back.
Unless, of course, having already lost his last five hands in a row---he's smart enough not to come back.
Quote: mwalz9The dude is a fraud
Personal insult -- Three days.
Quote: coachbellyHow could a loss rebate explain how MDawg won $5K
for the shoe that Wizard witnessed?
MDawg explained what happened in his challenge report,
it was exactly the same as every other report he has posted,
he pressed into the streaks.
He didn't need to predict when the streaks begin or end...read the reports.
Winning more hands than he lost explains how he won 5k for the shoe Wizard witnessed. Winning the streaks that he pressed into.
A loss rebate would explain why he's playing Baccarat in the first place, besides, he says he has one.
That aside, is it your contention that I don't think anyone could ever play a profitable shoe of Baccarat?
I pictured you, as you know, darker. Or not. Perhaps at least Ozzier. CARRY ON TM.Quote: darkozI've been doxxed! :)
Quote: Mission146is it your contention that I don't think anyone
could ever play a profitable shoe of Baccarat?
I haven't made any contention...but you did.
Quote: Mission146There is a mathematical explanation
and Wizard has been informed as to what it is.
He just can't say.
A loss rebate would explain why he's playing Baccarat in the first place
This is all speculation.
The Wizard did not assert that there is a mathematical explanation.
A loss rebate is not an explanation that the Wizard "just can't say".
MDawg did not post that he has received any loss rebate.
You don't need to speculate about why MDawg
is playing baccarat in the first place,
you can just ask him why right here.
Do you suppose that he'll answer
"I play baccarat because of the loss rebate" ?
Quote: coachbellyI haven't made any contention...but you did.
This is all speculation.
The Wizard did not assert that there is a mathematical explanation.
A loss rebate is not an explanation that the Wizard "just can't say".
MDawg did not post that he has received any loss rebate.
You don't need to speculate about why MDawg is playing baccarat in the first place,
you can just ask him why right here.
Do you suppose that he'll answer "I play baccarat because of the loss rebate" ?
Everything was all speculation before the challenge. Anyway, MDawg mentioned he had a loss rebate prior to the challenge---during one of his few losing session reports---so that would make it a component if there was an advantage and can frequently lead to an advantage by itself.
Quote: Mission146ADDED: How do you know I haven't asked him?
You know that I haven't asked him directly in this thread.
I don't know if you're sandbagging, but I can find out.
Ask MDawg directly in this thread, and then we will all know.
Did you ask the Wizard if he was informed of a mathematical explanation?
Quote: Mission146Everything was all speculation before the challenge.
You are speculating after the challenge, asserting facts not in evidence.
Quote: coachbellyYou are speculating after the challenge, asserting facts not in evidence.
Yeah, and you asserted that MDawg did not mention a loss rebate, which he did. If we're going to stick to asserting facts/statements in evidence, then I suggest asserting ones that are actually correct.
Quote: coachbellyI don't know if you're sandbagging, but I can find out.
Ask MDawg directly in this thread, and then we will all know.
Did you ask the Wizard if he was informed of a mathematical explanation?
Find out and you will find that I am not. I don't expect you to take my word for it anyway.
There's nothing to ask him in this thread. If he had anything that he wanted to say publicly vis-a-vis AP mechanisms, then I must assume he would have said it by now. I could get into probing/leading questions, but he's definitely smart enough to know where my questions are going, and that being the case, would either duck them, answer them in a diversionary way or ignore them altogether if he didn't want to state what he would know they were leading to.
I don't know if anyone in this thread presumes themselves as having the right to demand answers out of people, but if there are such people, then I am not one of them.
Did I ask the Wizard?
___________
(Reading)
___________
No need.
Quote: Mission146Yeah, and you asserted that MDawg did not mention a loss rebate
You are incorrect, sir.
Here is my quote...
Quote: coachbellyMDawg did not post that he has received any loss rebate.
He mentioned it, but did he claim that he received a loss rebate?
I don't recall him following up that he received it,
but I may have been suspended when he did.
Quote: MDawgif I didn't come home a winner from these trips wouldn't bother to go to Vegas at all
MDawg,
Is the reason that you play Baccarat in the first place because of a loss rebate?
Quote: MDawgDay 22 play
Yesterday was beyond hectic and the action went on for about eight hours more or less straight.
I played - I believe it was 3 shoes. First shoe I dumped about five grand quickly. Then I rallied and held my own for the next two shoes. A poker player on break from a tournament sat down with me and was betting erratically. I lost the entire 8K of my first marker and pulled another 20K. I was actually right about at even and put 1500 on Bank which the other player put his measly two hundred (his usual bet) on Player, and this influenced me to pull my bet. Banker won 2 to 1 on that hand. The guy left and I ended up losing. If I had won that 1500 hand the next hand was also Bank and I would have pressed to 2000, and the whole session might have gone another way, but instead, I lost that 20K marker, pulled another 20K marker and was betting heavily, including a 10,600 hand case bet I won, and lots of huge bets I lost.
I started the third shoe with about twenty thousand in front me and ended dumping all of that too. That was near my limit for what I'm willing to lose in one session, so I quit, about -48,000 for that session (less, since I had some chips on the table that I scooped up to take with me).
I then walked, and it was not a short walk, to another resort. I was thinking that I was going to pull a massive amount and play hard from the getgo, but when I got there I ran into the pit bosses who know me as a cool reserved amiable player and I didn't want to show my currently a bit agitated colors, so I just pulled 8K.
I arrived mid shoe and the Player was running, and no one else at the table was betting (there were no empty tables, for some reason yesterday was Baccarat day casinos were crowded with Bacc players), and the dealer kept free handing Player after Player until the pit boss said, "What are you doing?" to the dealer, knowing that I wouldn't let a streak go and I wanted to bet.
I put 500 on Player, won, 1500 on Player, won, 4500, won. Pit boss didn't even notice the bet until heard me yelling and said, "Wow. Well I would have yelled over winning 4500 too." I honestly then wanted to put 13500 on the next hand for Player, but I chickened out and just left 4500 on there. Player went only two more times so I ended up ahead 6500 for that sequence.
From there, for a long time, I kept getting stuck at about +5000 but eventually managed to get to +15000 for this session.
There were two other players at the table. One, and he was there with a friend, would bet only 100 or 200, and marched to own drummer. This player bet against us at times. This player even apologize about, hey, I'm not here to break the table karma, but if I see something and that it's not going past two, then I'm going to bet it. This player was actually right much of the time, but I didn't notice getting anywhere. Flat betting over the long term just doesn't work.
The other two players were together too. One would always bet the same amount - 3300. I asked what this was about and the player explained that it was a lucky number for Asians as it had something to do with 9. (Or, maybe was betting 3600 😆, I don't know, I wasn't watching that closely.) All this made me think was that there was no way this player could win because was also flat betting, albeit larger. This player's friend would jump in occasionally with $500 bets but near the end of their session was betting more a lot more, probably out of desperation. I saw them pull several 20K markers and then a 100K marker, and when they left the 100K was colored up and they walked with it, but not much more so they must have dumped some -60K or so between the two of them. I saw them toss some kind of player card I had never seen before of a color I had never seen before at this casino.
One issue that occasionally recurred with at least one of the pit bosses is that I was being told to calm down when I was winning and not be so loud, and not throw the cards on the table. I literally threw some of the winning cards off the table a couple of times because I got so excited on the more difficult draws. I'd declare, "That's a winning 4! even off the table."
I didn't have much experience with this pit boss who was making the most noise over my noise. I soundly ignored the pit boss and just told the pit boss that this is the way I play and I've always played this way. One pit boss told me that if I hit the dealer with the cards wouldn't let me open any longer. Again I mentioned that I never throw the cards when I lose a hand, I just fling them when I am happy. They also kept reminding to stay seated because occasionally I would throw the cards down from over the top of the plexiglass when I had a natural 9.
The prior crew, earlier in the day, all know me and don't care what I do, and in fact have commented more than once what a pleasure it is to have a positive, excited player at the table. Actually, I might just walk back to that resort and have an EYEBALL with whoever is in charge and lodge a complaint. Yesterday even the Asians at the table were getting excited and banging on the plexiglass when they won, and if the pit bosses can't handle that, they should just find another job.
After I got up fifteen grand at the end of the fourth shoe I think it was, I plunked 5000 on Bank and lost. Then I plunked 10000 on Bank and lost again - Player started with 1 and dealer actually pulled a 7 on top of the 1 and I couldn't draw anything more than a face card to try to increase my initial 6. Then at the beginning of the next shoe I lost 2000 to go from +15000 to -2000. That was the low point when I started to think that I might as well just accept the loss at the other casino and leave.
Then, things started turning for me, greatly. I got multiple runs which I pressed into, followed a chop perfectly, and went through a long period when I was winning something like 80% of my hands. During that period though I was betting only 500. When the main dealer came back and saw the stack of 500s asked why I had them. I explained that the entire stack had started with just one 500 chip. Dealer shook head and said, I would not have given you those small chips, 1000s only, I know you're hot tonight. Dealer was right, I would have won twice as much during that winning streak with the higher denomination chip.
What's amazing is that while I was knocking it out of the park the big two players were just sitting there watching. They didn't play into runs, they didn't follow streaks, they just bet very occasionally, and as far as the larger bettor of the two, always that same 3300 (or 3600) amount. Probably why they dumped sixty grand.
At the end of the sixth shoe, I was up over +38000 and quit. The time factor was starting to wear on me. I wanted to get another ten grand but just couldn't do it all in one go and didn't want to dump again. Given that I started with just an 8K marker, winning over 38 grand in one session is not bad at all. The dealer too commented that wasn't aware that I had pulled only an 8000 and that winning over 38K off that small amount was very good.
What's interesting is that I tipped very little during this big run session. I did lay some quarters out there, and a fifty once, and some reds early on, but somehow lost most of the green side bets for the dealer. I suppose I didn't view it as winning since I was actually in the hole for the day from the other resort, so I wasn't tipping much.
So that was it approximately -48000 at one resort, approximately +38000 at the other, approximately -10000 for the day. To pay the other resort I didn't want to deal with the cash and the CTR so I asked them to phone the other resort in advance and tell them I'm coming with the 38000 in their chips. Of course, the resort I won at temp closed my line, but so what, I don't need them right now and the line will reopen in a few days.
In the meantime, I am going to talk to my host to kick in my session loss rebate deal I have in place. I will actually ask for it this time. I won't get into details but I've always had that just rarely have to pull that card. Only problem I foresee is that I already paid off the line with a combination of foreign and their own chips. I should have left the amount I expect back unpaid, or paid off nothing and demanded the rebate before I paid. But, I have a hard time leaving a debt open when I have won.
Quote: Mission146I don't know if anyone in this thread presumes themselves
as having the right to demand answers out of people
What's that...your straw man?
The questioner need not presume to have the right to demand answers.
Answers to questions are an extended courtesy.
Here was my strategy:
1. Flat bet $200 on the Banker for 57 hands.
2. If ahead, quit.
3. If behind, Martingale on the Player until up $1 or lose $8,000. The reason I switch to the player is the math is easier.
4. If I don't have enough money to bet double the last loss, then bet as much as I can.
Here are the results of each session:
Total wins= 24,544,846
Total losses= 2,155,154
The probability of a net win is 91.9%.
When I did have a win after the 57 Banker hands, the average win was $546.34.
Considering all bets made, the average session had a loss of $143.50.
So, the value of this to Mdawg, had he played this way, would have been 91.9%*2000 + 8.1%*1000 - 143.50 = $1,775.78.
This could be improved upon slightly by always betting the Bank and going into the Martingale early if a net win after 57 hands would be impossible.
Quote: Mission146Last paragraph.
Quote: MDawgIn the meantime, I am going to talk to my host to kick in
my session loss rebate deal I have in place.
I will actually ask for it this time.
The quote above does not assert or confirm that he received it.
You're assuming that he did receive it...aren't you?
Quote: coachbellyThe quote above does not assert or confirm that he received it.
You're assuming that he did receive it...aren't you?
He said he was going to ask for it. You can ask him whether or not he received it. I personally don’t care.
Quote: Mission146He said he was going to ask for it.
The player has no mathematical advantage by claiming to have a loss rebate,
asking for a loss rebate, or asking for a loss rebate and not receiving it.
Isn't that correct?
Quote: coachbellyThe player has no mathematical advantage by claiming to have a loss rebate,
asking for a loss rebate, or asking for a loss rebate and not receiving it.
Isn't that correct?
Don’t do it, Mission!
Quote: coachbellyThe player has no mathematical advantage by claiming to have a loss rebate,
asking for a loss rebate, or asking for a loss rebate and not receiving it.
Isn't that correct?
He said he had a loss rebate deal in place, which means terms negotiated and accepted by the parties—being casino and player.
If one were to assume that the host would hold up his end of the deal, when requested, then one would perceive oneself to be at an advantage.
