THE CHALLENGE THREAD (split)
We Americans use it to describe a condition, a person, people, a place, a thing or an action.Quote: OnceDearAgreed and understood. But in my British interpretation, Retarded is a description directed at a person rather than his action, or in the case of your post a 'Fact'Quote: AxelWolfWhat a wonderful experiment. If Bob successfully gets 55%+ correctly he will claim victory "I knew I would do it" If not, he claims it wasn't a meaningful experiment. What a complete joke.
ps I didn't call anyone or everyone retarded, I said it's retarded to discuss SDs in this situation.
link to original post
Without a challenge, there can be no outcome.
It's like me spontaneously flipping a coin and calling 'Heads'. If it lands heads, I punch the air and whoop '100% success' If it lands tails, I shrug "I knew that was going to happen"
link to original post
In the case of the Mdawg challenge that the Wizard participated in, I failed to keep up in the thread as often happens, and I didn't know what the challenge was, though I spent some [OK not inexhaustive] time upthread trying to find it. All I knew was, Mike gave a confirmation. In his confirmation, he failed to link back to the exact challenge* he was confirming. Therefore, it was easy to believe that he was confirming that Mdawg's wild gambling claims were factual!
I was able to 'gather' that he was likely just confirming that Mdawg was a real person... one who at least in his presence gambled like a whale. As I remember, some sycophant of Mdawg claimed maybe in a different thread that in fact Mdawg's claims were now Wizard-confirmed! And Michael went off about that, but somehow didn't see it coming and participated by mistake in making this claim possible.
Will everyone please help make sure it is very clear what the challenge is? I thank all in advance.
* if it was instead all clear to anyone with a brain, OK then, I accept that I am just an idiot
Quote: odiousgambitHere is my only concern,
In the case of the Mdawg challenge that the Wizard participated in, I failed to keep up in the thread as often happens, and I didn't know what the challenge was, though I spent some [OK not inexhaustive] time upthread trying to find it. All I knew was, Mike gave a confirmation. In his confirmation, he failed to link back to the exact challenge* he was confirming. Therefore, it was easy to believe that he was confirming that Mdawg's wild gambling claims were factual!
I was able to 'gather' that he was likely just confirming that Mdawg was a real person... one who at least in his presence gambled like a whale. As I remember, some sycophant of Mdawg claimed maybe in a different thread that in fact Mdawg's claims were now Wizard-confirmed! And Michael went off about that, but somehow didn't see it coming and participated by mistake in making this claim possible.
Will everyone please help make sure it is very clear what the challenge is? I thank all in advance.
* if it was instead all clear to anyone with a brain, OK then, I accept that I am just an idiot
link to original post
There was a challenge for the Wizard to see if MDawg played like a whale and also prevailed in winning the particular session. I forget the exact details as to how a win was to be determined.
MDawg was challenged by someone or they accepted his challenge but some ridiculous back and forth happened and I stepped in and said this is mad easy. Here is the money for the challenge. I really just wanted the challenge to happen.
A lot of people on here faulted me for throwing away my cash ($2000) but I have paid for worse garbage before and more expensive. I just wanted the challenge to happen.
The Wizard watched him play and win for the session. I wasn't there so cannot give personal details how it went down.
I encourage another MDawg Challenge (brought to you by DarkOz) to establish any more of these details. Or if AxelWolf wants to put his money where his mouth is, I should be able to produce records to show him proof of many sessions this year where I bet to mid-five figures for multiple (WINNING) hands in a row. Certainly, I could have Wizard witness a future session where I bet to those levels.
Howwwww much shall we wager?
If EvenBob does a Challenge with Wizard, then I believe that EvenBob and MDawg will be the only ones.
Quote: MDawgI play at a private table, which only whales play at these.
Come on, man, you know that's not true.... You don't have to be a whale to get a private table. You can get one with a credit line of, what did you say? $250k or so? That's not whale status, especially not at the higher tier casinos. Definitely deep into high roller territory, though.
As well if you watch the DISCOVERY documentary on Vegas (High Roller's Vegas), it defined "premium players" as those with a $20K or higher credit line. Now, granted, that was in 1998, BUT that was during the dot com heyday, when cash was rampant among entrepreneurs. The Discovery channel documentary said that there were only about 20000 such players in the world (at that time), players who could afford to lose $20K in a trip and come back again and again at those same levels.
One thing that premium players generally have in common is that they play on credit.
I was playing with credit lines in that neighborhood at that time, as a pup, so I was born a high roller. And am today, a whale.
What's in a name anyway? What matters is WINNING, not the definition of whether one is a whale, premium player, high roller, or whatever.
Quote: MDawgThe point being - how many people on this forum have been vetted. To any degree?
If EvenBob does a Challenge with Wizard, then I believe that EvenBob and MDawg will be the only ones.
link to original post
You would be believing wrong.
Wizard has actually taken part in plays with Axel I believe?
And he understands how multiple cards works so he doesn't need to vet that play except for some ridiculous claim.
Nothing much has been reported and nothing has been done according to strict pre-determined rules, like my Challenge.
That's just showing up to do something or other with a forum member, which cursorily establishes that the forum member was involved with something at one time. We don't even know exactly what was involved.
And wasn't it at Ellis Island? 🤣 Every time (well maybe not every time, but some of the times) I drive by that dump I think of AWolf and PGrinder lining up to go inside like soldiers sent to their doom. (Disclaimer: I have never been inside For all I know it's on par with the Taj Mahal. In India.)
well I hope the thread doesn't get hijacked over an argument about what a whale is.Quote: MDawgThe MDawg Challenge established on the basis of one witnessed session anyway, both that I win and that I am able to bet (press into) runs exactly the way I have always claimed. That particular session was a somewhat small dollar limit (high bet was 3500) session just to prove that I win. In sessions both before and after that one I have bet to both table limits and special limits. For a while now, I play at a private table, which only whales play at these.
I encourage another MDawg Challenge (brought to you by DarkOz) to establish any more of these details. Or if AxelWolf wants to put his money where his mouth is, I should be able to produce records to show him proof of many sessions this year where I bet to mid-five figures for multiple (WINNING) hands in a row. Certainly, I could have Wizard witness a future session where I bet to those levels.
Howwwww much shall we wager?
[images not shown]
link to original post
the Wizard confirmation was this: https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/472/#post803695 .... referring to the 'conditions of the challenge' and alas failed to repeat them or give a link.
I have to think he would gladly give back the $500 now in order to know that not a single person reading that thought Mdawg was someone getting wealthy playing baccarat without a +ev strategy
I'm searching now for where the Wizard had to come down hard on somebody for claiming he verified something like that
Quote: MDawgNone of that is vetting.
Nothing much has been reported and nothing has been done according to strict pre-determined rules, like my Challenge.
That's just showing up to do something or other with a forum member, which cursorily establishes that the forum member was involved with something at one time. We don't even know exactly what was involved.
And wasn't it at Ellis Island? 🤣 Every time (well maybe not every time, but some of the times) I drive by that dump I think of AWolf and PGrinder lining up to go inside like soldiers sent to their doom. (Disclaimer: I have never been inside For all I know it's on par with the Taj Mahal. In India.)
link to original post
But you haven't been vetted either. One session showed that maybe you got lucky.
What Axel and I do the Wizard doesn't need to vet because he already knows it's possible.
If I told you I ran the NY marathon you would not have to vet if that was possible. It certainly is (regardless of whether I did or not.)
But if I claimed to run the NY marathon in a record time of half an hour NOW THAT would need to be vetted. Not to confirm the person was participatory but if even participating the claim was even possible.
Yes vetted! (MDawg...and perhaps soon, EvenBob too)
Quote: AxelWolfLet me know in the next 30 minutes if you accept and I will put up 12k with Mike if you agree to do the same within the next 10 days.
link to original post
Oh, man, this is gettin' real! We might need a new thread for this....!
Quote: odiousgambit
I'm searching now for where the Wizard had to come down hard on somebody for claiming he verified something like that
link to original post
Here you go, ODG
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/36647-the-adventures-of-mdawg-ii/3/#post833802
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/36647-the-adventures-of-mdawg-ii/3/#post833866
Quote: wizardI am still furious about the Marcus statement. However, I don't like to make decisions when on an emotional high or low. Plus, it involves me, so there would clearly be bias. Thus, I will leave sentencing, including none at all, up to the other admins. Let the record show I am absolutely pressing charges for, at the least, false quoting.
Now, ODG, lets not hijack the thread.
Quote: MDawgNot vetted! (the others)
Yes vetted! (MDawg...and perhaps soon, EvenBob too)
link to original post
I said you are a real person.
Mike has met me as well.
sounds reasonable. PM me your requirements. I will expect the same terms and probably have some of my own.Quote: MDawgAs far as this poker thing with AWolf, he and I have been exchanging PMs on a subject that must be resolved beyond just "Trust me bro" before I will consent to even meeting him for any purposes.
link to original post
As to that, youll just have to trust me bro.
Quote: EvenBobCould a moderator please remove the last five pages of Mdawg related posts and put them where they belong? They completely hijacked this thread which I thought we didn't do. Thank you advance.
link to original post
Let's do everybody a favor and just delete the thread.
Quote: EvenBobCould a moderator please remove the last five pages of Mdawg related posts and put them where they belong? They completely hijacked this thread which I thought we didn't do. Thank you advance.
link to original post
Yes, but I can't get to it for 2 hours.
If one of the other moderators cares to jump in, I won't feel bad about it.
Quote: EvenBobCould a moderator please remove the last five pages of Mdawg related posts and put them where they belong? They completely hijacked this thread which I thought we didn't do. Thank you advance.
link to original post
Awww I thought you didn't care what anyone posted and this wasn't about attention for yourself.
Quote: darkozQuote: EvenBobCould a moderator please remove the last five pages of Mdawg related posts and put them where they belong? They completely hijacked this thread which I thought we didn't do. Thank you advance.
link to original post
Awww I thought you didn't care what anyone posted and this wasn't about attention for yourself.
link to original post
This is ridiculous, page after page of non topic posts. Enough is enough
Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozQuote: EvenBobCould a moderator please remove the last five pages of Mdawg related posts and put them where they belong? They completely hijacked this thread which I thought we didn't do. Thank you advance.
link to original post
Awww I thought you didn't care what anyone posted and this wasn't about attention for yourself.
link to original post
This is ridiculous, page after page of non topic posts. Enough is enough
link to original post
Wait did you see a pattern?
Quote: EvenBob
This is ridiculous, page after page of non topic posts. Enough is enough
link to original post
The requested thread split has been effected.
Unfortunately, I do have a life outside of the forum, which sometimes impacts the level of service I am able to provide.
Thank you for your patience and understanding.
-D
Quote: DieterQuote: EvenBob
Could a moderator please remove the last five pages of Mdawg related posts and put them where they belong? They completely hijacked this thread which I thought we didn't do. Thank you advance.
link to original post
The requested thread split has been effected.
Unfortunately, I do have a life outside of the forum, which sometimes impacts the level of service I am able to provide.
Thank you for your patience and understanding.
-D
link to original post
And I didn't do the thread split because I couldn't figure out where these 5 pages of Mdawg-related posts belonged. And, nooooo, I wasn't going to ask the forum for suggestions.
And I am admiring the green D that Dieter has signed his post with.
Quote: MDawg
established on the basis of one witnessed session anyway, both that I win and that I am able to bet (press into) runs exactly the way I have always claimed.
hunh______????____________say what___________????
one winning session establishes something_______?
pressing into runs - hunh______?______________________anybody can do that - and a great many do - I hope you're not trying to claim that constitues some kind of winning method
there has to be more to it than that
in fairness to you - maybe you weren't claiming that that is what it is all about - just describing your play - because that by itself definitely does not lead to long term winnings
.
Quote: FTBWhere do we stand on this? Hopefully excuses aren't gonna be made to back out of this challenge...
link to original post
The challenge happened well over a year ago and no one backed down.
This thread got poorly renamed as a split from a hijack discussion in the EB thread.
There is currently no challenge at this time.
I am referring to the recent gauntlet laid down October 12th of this year. Unless I'm mistaken, this thread shouldn't even have your name attached to it...Quote: darkozQuote: FTBWhere do we stand on this? Hopefully excuses aren't gonna be made to back out of this challenge...
link to original post
The challenge happened well over a year ago and no one backed down.
This thread got poorly renamed as a split from a hijack discussion in the EB thread.
There is currently no challenge at this time.
link to original post
1. MDawg did play baccarat at the black chip and above level for the session witnessed by the Wizard
2. MDawg bet in the manner he generally described before the challenge
3. MDawg won money on the single session Wizard witnessed
Unless I missed something, nothing else was proven or disproven.
Quote: AxelWolfWell here was an opportunity to show me just how "real" you are. Crickets.Quote: MDawgNot vetted! (the others)
Yes vetted! (MDawg...and perhaps soon, EvenBob too)
link to original postQuote: AxelWolfPlease quote where I'm arguing that she must have cheated. I think I made it clear I didn't think she was cheating, but I wasn't ruling anything out.Quote: MDawgQuote: MDawgProbably what Phil Ivey said made the most sense, that he heard Robbi mention that "all I have is a 3" during the hand, that she misread her hand, then later was embarrassed and didn't want to seem dumb in front of the other pros, so was equivocal about her mistake.
link to original post
According to Ivey: "If you notice in the middle of the hand she asked, Can you beat a 3?...She misread her hand, and she didn't want to say [later] that she misread her hand, because she's at a poker table."
Phil Ivey shares what he thinks happened during the Robbi vs GMAN infamous poker hand
The fact that you seem to keep arguing that she must have cheated, makes me even more confident that I could beat you at heads up poker! I continue to believe that you have poor reads on people, including on me.
link to original post
Given that you lodged a complaint against me regarding something you may have said, and I was asked to prove it, ill be seeking the same in this case.
Regarding your comment about playing heads up, I have already made a proposal a few years back and you made some type of excuse and then basically ignored it when I said we could solve those issues.
I'm more than willing to play you heads up. I think Mike would be willing to host it on a real table with real chips. I can get a professional dealer or ask Mike to deal. I already suspect you'll just try to come up with excuses or engage in some big-bet fluff situation.
To avoid that, I'll just tell you now... I'd be willing to do three 4k buy-in freezeouts. Less if you wish.
link to original post
link to original post
Quote: TigerWuQuote: AxelWolfLet me know in the next 30 minutes if you accept and I will put up 12k with Mike if you agree to do the same within the next 10 days.
link to original post
Oh, man, this is gettin' real! We might need a new thread for this....!
link to original post
Quote: darkozQuote: FTBWhere do we stand on this? Hopefully excuses aren't gonna be made to back out of this challenge...
link to original post
The challenge happened well over a year ago and no one backed down.
This thread got poorly renamed as a split from a hijack discussion in the EB thread.
There is currently no challenge at this time.
link to original post
PM's are open.
Happy to hear suggestions for better and worse names.
Quote: DieterQuote: darkozQuote: FTBWhere do we stand on this? Hopefully excuses aren't gonna be made to back out of this challenge...
link to original post
The challenge happened well over a year ago and no one backed down.
This thread got poorly renamed as a split from a hijack discussion in the EB thread.
There is currently no challenge at this time.
link to original post
PM's are open.
Happy to hear suggestions for better and worse names.
link to original post
How about THE CHALLENGE THREAD. Future challenges can go here as well. They usually cause a hijack anyway
And one of the names this thread is named after should be changed as well as he was not the challenger as I alluded to in an earlier post.
I haven't received any PM's from him regarding this, It's been crickets every since.Quote: FTBI am referencing this poker-related challenge...
Quote: AxelWolfWell here was an opportunity to show me just how "real" you are. Crickets.Quote: MDawgNot vetted! (the others)
Yes vetted! (MDawg...and perhaps soon, EvenBob too)
link to original postQuote: AxelWolfPlease quote where I'm arguing that she must have cheated. I think I made it clear I didn't think she was cheating, but I wasn't ruling anything out.Quote: MDawgQuote: MDawgProbably what Phil Ivey said made the most sense, that he heard Robbi mention that "all I have is a 3" during the hand, that she misread her hand, then later was embarrassed and didn't want to seem dumb in front of the other pros, so was equivocal about her mistake.
link to original post
According to Ivey: "If you notice in the middle of the hand she asked, Can you beat a 3?...She misread her hand, and she didn't want to say [later] that she misread her hand, because she's at a poker table."
Phil Ivey shares what he thinks happened during the Robbi vs GMAN infamous poker hand
The fact that you seem to keep arguing that she must have cheated, makes me even more confident that I could beat you at heads up poker! I continue to believe that you have poor reads on people, including on me.
link to original post
Given that you lodged a complaint against me regarding something you may have said, and I was asked to prove it, ill be seeking the same in this case.
Regarding your comment about playing heads up, I have already made a proposal a few years back and you made some type of excuse and then basically ignored it when I said we could solve those issues.
I'm more than willing to play you heads up. I think Mike would be willing to host it on a real table with real chips. I can get a professional dealer or ask Mike to deal. I already suspect you'll just try to come up with excuses or engage in some big-bet fluff situation.
To avoid that, I'll just tell you now... I'd be willing to do three 4k buy-in freezeouts. Less if you wish.
link to original post
link to original postQuote: TigerWuQuote: AxelWolfLet me know in the next 30 minutes if you accept and I will put up 12k with Mike if you agree to do the same within the next 10 days.
link to original post
Oh, man, this is gettin' real! We might need a new thread for this....!
link to original post
link to original post
(2) There is no other challenge. As AxelWolf is aware, the PMs he and I have exchanged lately concern why I would ever want to meet him, for any reason. Other than "trust me bro'" we haven't made much progress in that topic. I will not elaborate further unless AWolf wants to nail down in public what we have been discussing.
Also, someone who knows both AWolf and me, said in the past, that couldn't imagine any challenge that I should undertake with AxelWolf, so there is that advice against this as well.
Quote: MDawgThe MDawg Challenge established on the basis of one witnessed session anyway, both that I win and that I am able to bet (press into) runs exactly the way I have always claimed. That particular session was a somewhat small dollar limit (high bet was 3500) session just to prove that I win. In sessions both before and after that one I have bet to both table limits and special limits. For a while now, I play at a private table, which only whales play at these.
I encourage another MDawg Challenge (brought to you by DarkOz) to establish any more of these details. Or if AxelWolf wants to put his money where his mouth is, I should be able to produce records to show him proof of many sessions this year where I bet to mid-five figures for multiple (WINNING) hands in a row. Certainly, I could have Wizard witness a future session where I bet to those levels.
Howwwww much shall we wager?
(Quote clipped to remove screenshots)
If you would quit snipping my quotes, then I could quit wasting my time offering clarification, especially when your post followed by my partial quote implies something that it did not say.
The session established that you:
A. Exist.
B. Are either a regular high-roller or had access to enough money to be a high roller that day, though I have unwaveringly believed the former on that...and also don't really care either way.
C. Won that particular session, which is proof of exactly nothing vis-a-vis the long-term viability of your strategy, method or whatever you want to call it.
So, when I said that it was a disaster for those who would call you a liar, I meant nothing more than those who would otherwise claim that you do not exist and/or are not a high roller.
I hope that I can assume this is the last time I will be taken out of context in this regard, at least, on WoV anyway.
Quote: darkoz
But you haven't been vetted either. One session showed that maybe you got lucky.
What Axel and I do the Wizard doesn't need to vet because he already knows it's possible.
If I told you I ran the NY marathon you would not have to vet if that was possible. It certainly is (regardless of whether I did or not.)
But if I claimed to run the NY marathon in a record time of half an hour NOW THAT would need to be vetted. Not to confirm the person was participatory but if even participating the claim was even possible.
link to original post
Depending on his betting parameters, in order to win just one session, it can be significantly more probable than not. In other words, if you're structuring your betting the right way, then you'd have to be unlucky not to succeed.
A martingale, for example, is significantly more likely to achieve a modest win goal (especially if only one unit) than to fail.
Quote: MDawg(1) Since the actual MDawg challenge brought to you by DarkOz was in the Adventures of MDawg I thread, and discussed in the Adventures of MDawg I thread, I'd suggest that all posts in this thread simply be moved to the current Adventures of MDawg II thread.
link to original post
No, for technical reasons.
The feature to split exists; a good means of recombination does not.
Think of a log and an axe - once you've made toothpicks, putting the log back together doesn't work so good.
Quote: Dieter
Think of a log and an axe - once you've made toothpicks, putting the log back together doesn't work so good.
link to original post
Give the toothpicks to EvenBob. I'm sure he would claim to have a way to put them back together again.
But seriously, was this thread supposed to be a poker challenge between MDawg and Axel?
And to recap...
Someone said in that ridiculous roulette thread that he was confident he could beat another forum member at heads up poker and believed that forum member has poor reads on people, including on that someone.
Sure enough, said forum member threw down the gauntlet (and stated said gauntlet was thrown down before, only to be met with excuses).
As predicted, more excuses followed by that someone and the poker-related challenge was not accepted, which might lead some to say that someone should not share their empty beliefs if one isn't prepared to back up the talk.
I guess it was just all talk after all...
Quote: TigerWuQuote: Dieter
Think of a log and an axe - once you've made toothpicks, putting the log back together doesn't work so good.
link to original post
Give the toothpicks to EvenBob. I'm sure he would claim to have a way to put them back together again.
link to original post
Kintsugi creates a new thing from the pieces of the old.
This is different than un-breaking it.
