"I Am a Card Counter"
My new book “I Am a Card Counter: Inside the World of Advantage-Play Blackjack” has just been published. It is a no-holds barred description of my 25 years of advantage blackjack play (11 with my wife as my teammate).
Check it out: http://tinyurl.com/kv8ekla
I'm not sure if you meant counter, if so, well....You cant name the greatest BJ counter ever, because he would never let such information to get to the public. No offence, but he probably wouldn't even talk to you or anyone who writes books or works with casino.Quote: FrankScobleteI think this will be fun for readers: I name the person who is the greatest blackjack player ever and I explain why. I think some of you will know the guy. It will be fun to see the comments about him.
Do u have an audio book? I would like to listen to some of your stuff in the car or on my computer, it sounds interesting and i like your writing( just no DI stuff). I must be multitasking and can't read for enjoyment unless its short.
Quote: AxelWolfI'm not sure if you meant counter, if so, well....You cant name the greatest BJ counter ever, because he would never let such information to get to the public. No offence, but he probably wouldn't even talk to you or anyone who writes books or works with casino.
Do u have an audio book? I would like to listen to some of your stuff in the car or on my computer, it sounds interesting and i like your writing( just no DI stuff). I must be multitasking and can't read for enjoyment unless its short.
Aren't there just the highest tier counters who can keep perfect count and know all the strategy changes? I mean I would assume, and it's stupid, that the greatest counter is the one who's just running well and has a massive bankroll to survive down swings.
Even without reading about the greatest blackjack player, already we can see disagreements. It should be interesting if you read the book and find out who he was. And, perhaps, you knew him.
Why? I was disappointed with the three Craps books of yours that I purchased. There just wasn't enough difference in content between them and I didn't learn much after the first one. I did learn about betting and stuff like that, which was valuable. The dice influence/control stuff...well it is dice influence/control stuff. If I believed it possible, I still wouldn't have the time to commit to doing it.
I will look for your book in a cheap sale and read it them.
My thoughts aside, I do wish you luck with sales!!
Quote: FrankScobleteRon, which of my craps books did you read?
The two I am sure of (I have the books right here as I am typing this):
Forever Craps
Casino Craps
I think the third one was "Beat the Craps out of the Casino: How to Play Craps and Win!" but I am not sure. I can't find the third book.
Don't consider what I said all negative--I still review one of the two books I have in my nightstand before each trip to play craps. I do find value in them.
My perception of Frank was more of an academic, a writer, who played blackjack and other casino games and wrote about his experiences. And that's ok, nothing wrong with that. I just wasn't sure what qualified you as an 'expert', Frank, which you are often described as. Admittedly, I don't know much about you, other than what I have read on Wikipedia and we all know how accurate that can sometimes be...lol.
So, can I ask you a couple questions about your lifetime of blackjack experience Frank, and I mean no disrespect when I say that? Did you ever play blackjack or gamble professionally? Meaning the bulk of your income came from such. What monetary level of player are/were you? I do not mean to imply that someone who does not play 'professionally' or play high stakes, can not qualify as an expert. There are a couple guys that I know from different sites that I participate on that do not play professionally, that I consider experts. I only wish I had their 'expertise' and knowledge. Of course there is something to be said for the mental make up of someone that plays professionally. We experience emotions that a non-professional can't possible understand. We don't get to put the game on the back burner and take a break after bad beat downs, knowing that a paycheck will still come rolling in to pay the rent or mortgage. But that's really another matter.
Lastly, I would like to say that although I raise questions of your qualifications as an 'expert', I do enjoy your participation here and writing style. I also am a big fan of books and stories where players (of any level) share their experiences, so I have some interest in your book.
And for what it's worth: Someone suggested that the greatest blackjack player ever is probably an unknown. I agree with this. He was a guy so good, that he went about his business totally unknown and drawing zero attention, both in the community and in the casinos. Just totally under the radar.
Is this the big selling point? Can you post up the name and some reasons why from your book.Quote: FrankScobleteSodawater, I have no idea what you are referring to.
Even without reading about the greatest blackjack player, already we can see disagreements. It should be interesting if you read the book and find out who he was. And, perhaps, you knew him.
I think any personal questions people have about me should be answered by this book.
Quote: Dicenor33Being a gambling writer is a serious business. Not mentioning that the wrong advise can ruin someone's life, it's so easy to get discredited by professional mathematicians, which in turn makes everything you write a joke. This site presents one of the most brilliant minds in gambling industry, you need to have some nerves to portray yourself as one of the authorities on a subject when coming here. Mr. Scoblete, you might be a hero among your pals, but here, nobody takes your writing as anything worth reading.
Dicenor,
I think you have a perfect right to be critical of Frank's work if you choose to do so. However, I would disagree, looking at posts even within this thread, that "...here, nobody takes your writing as anything worth reading." And I myself find Frank pretty amusing and interesting, with a lot of anecdotal color and style. So, I would request you not speak for me, at least, with that statement. Thanks.
Quote: Dicenor33Being a gambling writer is a serious business. Not mentioning that the wrong advise can ruin someone's life, it's so easy to get discredited by professional mathematicians, which in turn makes everything you write a joke. This site presents one of the most brilliant minds in gambling industry, you need to have some nerves to portray yourself as one of the authorities on a subject when coming here. Mr. Scoblete, you might be a hero among your pals, but here, nobody takes your writing as anything worth reading.
This is wrong. While I am very skeptical of DI, I look forward to Frank's writing. His posts are very high quality. We don't all need to believe all the same stuff, it's ok to disagree on some things.
I don't think anyone would object if Mr. Scoblete wrote only fiction or personal memoirs, but to present oneself as an authority on gambling and then give faulty advice is wrong. Luckily, I was able to discern the truth before I reached gambling age, so Mr. Scoblete's book cost me only the purchase price and not thousands more.
Later, in college, when I was learning to count cards, I found myself subscribed to the Scoblete Atlantic City Blackjack Report, where I read drivel like (paraphrasing) "The Taj Mahal's tables are a GREAT place to practice GOLDEN TOUCH CRAPS (hyperlink to bunco dicesetting class)." As if the type of table could have any effect whatsoever on craps.
I will say that I admire Mr. Scoblete's talent to market his writing and systems, because they probably do sell to the same types of people that casinos themselves want to take advantage of: the gullible, the desperate, and the ignorant.
My new blackjack book should give a good description of what I experienced in my 25 years of play. I'd think that 25 years is a good gauge of ability. Generally I averaged 130 days a year at the casinos.
Anyway, any of you responding on this thread who would like me to send you a free copy of the book just send a message to me with your address and I will send you the book. If any of you (and I think there may be many of you) who have played over a significant period of time will find that my book about me could also be my book about you.
So your chance of making money on each sale was 100 percent, while your acolytes were forking over real money for -- at best -- an unproven chance to alter the odds of a negative game. That's the secret behind any system seller. You get real money up front, and the buyers get a chance to make money at the table. Some of them do, just like some would have without buying your system. Some lose and abandon your system, but some lose and desperately cling to the system, hoping it will "kick in" soon.
As an example of what poor advice you've offered, how about a solid decade of saying things like "bouncy" dice tables are bad places to play craps? I just checked your April 2014 BJInsider AC BJ report, and you are still writing this nonsense.
And dice influence is not the only poor advice you give.
The book I was unfortunate enough to purchase, "Beat the Craps out of the Casinos: How to Play Craps and Win!" is full of pseudoscience and losing systems.
Here is an excerpt to demonstrate. Note that the U.S. copyright law of fair use permits brief excerpts of copyrighted books for the purposes of review and criticism.
Quote: Frank Scoblete
You realize that everything in this excerpt is gibberish, right?
People playing craps by using your "5-count" method of betting will not enjoy any advantage over a monkey betting his chips blindly, yet it is the heart of your book that purports in its title, twice, that purchasers will beat the casinos at their own craps games.
Do you still stand behind this "5-count" nonsense? Or have you moved on to more modern forms of snake oil?
Quote: FrankScoblete
Anyway, any of you responding on this thread who would like me to send you a free copy of the book just send a message to me with your address and I will send you the book.
No thanks, but I would take a refund, if offered, for "Beat the Craps out of the Casinos: How to Play Craps and Win!"
It was purchased in a Barnes and Noble store in the late 90s, but I am sorry to say I no longer have the receipt.
The 5-Count will eliminate 57 percent of the random rolls. That means the shooter only bets on 43 percent of the random rolls. If the shooter is used to playing for four hours (or any number of hours) his losses will be reduced by those percentages. Short of not betting on anyone (something that is best to do as a dice controller) this will help keep the expected losses much lower. By the way, the best attack on the book "Beat the Craps Out of the Casinos" is to look at the Supersystem which was a totally wrong approach and one I rejected in subsequent years. (I was young; I was foolish. I wrote that book 25 years ago.)
As for dice control I think this has been beaten to death on this site. There are two ways to prove you have the skill. The first is to keep a record of your SRR in practice and see if you are really reducing the appearance of the seven. Yes, this does take thousands of rolls. The second is to use SmartCraps to establish whether you have on-axis control. There are three tests in SmartCraps. If you can pass all three, the program will explain what your edge is and what dice sets to use. This is a test of not reducing the seven as it is to focus on certain numbers. So a player can ascertain for himself whether he has such skill or not. You can fool yourself but you can't fool the tests.
Certainly going into a casino for the first few times will be nerve wracking, but after awhile the player will relax and see the money coming his way. What stops many would-be dice controllers does not have anything to do with whether they can attain the skill but how they bet into that skill. Too many craps players are gamblers and get caught up in the controlled riot that is a craps game. They make bets they can't beat. Think of that as a card counter who throws out big bets in negative counts.
Oh, yes, by the way tables that are "bouncy" are more difficult to beat than traditional tables. The more energy the dice have the harder they are to control. The bouncy tables push back the energy on the dice when they hit the felt with more power than traditional tables do. There is nothing wrong or underhanded in stating this.
Anyway, I'm sorry you think that what I wrote was nonsense and an attempt to rip off players. It wasn't and it isn't.
Also, it's hilarious that your 5-count not only promotes the pseudoscience of controlled rolling, but it also does so on unwitting shooters! That is, sometimes the people shooting the dice are not even trying to control them in any way, but your 5-count will try to identify "natural" rhythmic rollers.
Scratch that, it would hilarious if it didn't cost your customers untold thousands of dollars following this laughable system.
Also, do not try to frame it as such that using the 5-count will cause players to bet less often, thus reducing house edge. Of course the best system for craps is to not play at all. Your book sold the 5-count as a way to BEAT craps, not to bet less to reduce losses.
I don't think such statistics are evil, wrong or laughable. The 5-Count is a help for gamblers whether it is a random game or not. Put succinctly, they are betting on fewer random rolls.
As far as the publicity for the book goes --- it's simple. As my first book I had no control over anything. That included marketing. As I started to become well-known and as my books became best sellers I got more and more control. Sadly, that is how it is in the publishing business.
Anyway, I think I have answered your questions. Today for a random game of craps I recommend one bet after the 5-Count is reached and that bet should be a Pass line with odds or a Come bet with odds.
I also understand that we are at the point in this conversation where nothing more needs to be said. If you want the last jab feel free to take it.
Quote: FrankScobleteSodawater, they save 57 percent based on the 5-Count. I realize you believe that every roll is random. Fine. Even so, if you reduce the number of random rolls by 57 percent that is quite a help for players playing a random game. If a "natural" rhythmic roller is at a table why does using the 5-Count hurt a player using it?
I have a better system, and I won't even charge for it.
I call it the Sodawater 100-count. Wait until you see a shooter roll 100 consecutive point numbers before placing a single bet. This will eliminate 100 percent of random rolls and will save you the MAXIMUM on craps. It's the most powerful craps system possible.
I imagine you must therefore also have one for roulette?
How about the big wheel, based on the comparative success of the presidents featured on the currency pinned to it? That explains why the $50 and $100 bets don't do as well as the $1 and $5 choices: Grant was a lousy president, and Franklin never was one.
Every roll is random. I keep repeating that every time I walk by a craps table or roulette wheel.
It might be interesting to read about the personalities, the situations, and the life. But how much of it can be true, if everything else you write is fiction?
Quote: rhodyBobYou had my interest until I realized you were talking about a system for... craps!
I imagine you must therefore also have one for roulette?
But there MUST be a way to beat that big dollar wheel. I can't recall reading anything about it (he said, anticipating the next book jacket image to show up in the next reply...) so there might just be a large, missed opportunity for someone to capitalize on. I think it has something to do with the rotation of the earth, explaining how the methods here don't work in the southern hemisphere.
Gotta go. My cat has turned me on to a method to discern the MegaMillions numbers for tonight's lottery drawing. See... you wait till he takes a crap. You examine the results there amongst the kitty litter clumps, and based on how much this one is like the one he did yesterday, that's how you choose the number. it's all a matter of discerning the patterns. Crap. Craps. I see the connection here.
With all due respect, I never said his books are boring, but that is what they are - a fun read, with a whole bunch of fictitious characters. A hard core gambler extracts very little value out of this read.Quote: beachbumbabsDicenor,
I think you have a perfect right to be critical of Frank's work if you choose to do so. However, I would disagree, looking at posts even within this thread, that "...here, nobody takes your writing as anything worth reading." And I myself find Frank pretty amusing and interesting, with a lot of anecdotal color and style. So, I would request you not speak for me, at least, with that statement. Thanks.
Quote: sodawaterNo thanks, but I would take a refund, if offered, for "Beat the Craps out of the Casinos: How to Play Craps and Win!"
It was purchased in a Barnes and Noble store in the late 90s, but I am sorry to say I no longer have the receipt.
I am staying out of taking sides on this because I have never read any of Franks book's, but this may be the post of the year to date.
My baccarat book (1998) has a card counting system in it but I let the readers know that this system can't actually beat the game.
My craps books range from "Beat the Craps Out of the Casino" (1990) to "Casino Craps: Shoot to Win" (2012) and all have the 5-Count in them. Great way to reduce the hit on one's bankroll (as long as you play your standard game). All the bets I recommend are the best ones. The advantage-play area is dice control. I agree the best way to avoid random shooters is not to bet on any of them. So the 100 count would be preferable.
My blackjack books deal with card counting and some other advantage-play techniques, as well as basic strategies, etc. You will see these strategies in action in my new blackjack book. The count I recommend to basic strategy players who have trouble with Hi-Lo or other traditional counts is Speed Count. Nowhere do I claim that Speed Count is better than the traditional counting systems. Those players who master the traditional systems should stick with them. In "Beat Blackjack Now" I write about the Hi-Lo and Speed Count. I do not pretend that Speed Count is the best count to use for players who are already counters or for players who have no problem learning Hi-Lo. The critics who say I put Speed Count above Hi-Lo have not read the books.
There are no strategies that I lie about. I am not selling "winning betting systems" because in random games there are no winning betting systems. However, structuring your bets properly at blackjack when you card count and in dice control is essential to winning. And reducing the amount you bet on random games is a good approach. You will note that my strategies on all random games is one that has the reduction of betting and the reducing of speed as the central core.
I am not quite sure why there is such hostility towards me but que será será.
personally, I think you add to the site. I probably am more willing to admire your selling ability than most ... you have the right to sell your books. You are a pretty good writer, can get your books sold... maybe aren't heading to Sweden for your Nobel.
but
* it's the internet
* you are vulnerable; not all the criticism seems out in left field
Quote: FrankScobleteI write about all the games. When I wrote the roulette book (1996) I did have several biased wheel strategies. I doubt those old style wheels are likely to be found anymore. When I wrote my first slot book (1993) I interviewed a casino manager who told me how the casinos set up their slot machines. These set-ups are no longer done. My new slot book (2012) has the advantage-play machines.
My baccarat book (1998) has a card counting system in it but I let the readers know that this system can't actually beat the game.
My craps books range from "Beat the Craps Out of the Casino" (1990) to "Casino Craps: Shoot to Win" (2012) and all have the 5-Count in them. Great way to reduce the hit on one's bankroll (as long as you play your standard game). All the bets I recommend are the best ones. The advantage-play area is dice control. I agree the best way to avoid random shooters is not to bet on any of them. So the 100 count would be preferable.
My blackjack books deal with card counting and some other advantage-play techniques, as well as basic strategies, etc. You will see these strategies in action in my new blackjack book. The count I recommend to basic strategy players who have trouble with Hi-Lo or other traditional counts is Speed Count. Nowhere do I claim that Speed Count is better than the traditional counting systems. Those players who master the traditional systems should stick with them. In "Beat Blackjack Now" I write about the Hi-Lo and Speed Count. I do not pretend that Speed Count is the best count to use for players who are already counters or for players who have no problem learning Hi-Lo. The critics who say I put Speed Count above Hi-Lo have not read the books.
There are no strategies that I lie about. I am not selling "winning betting systems" because in random games there are no winning betting systems. However, structuring your bets properly at blackjack when you card count and in dice control is essential to winning. And reducing the amount you bet on random games is a good approach. You will note that my strategies on all random games is one that has the reduction of betting and the reducing of speed as the central core.
I am not quite sure why there is such hostility towards me but que será será.
I find your self-promotional posts offensive. I do not care who the 'best blackjack player in the world' is, in your mind, and the wacky misadventures you and your wife had as you aged. You seemingly remedied this situation by offering people free copies of the book, making it so you at least were not trying to take people's money here--maybe a little free word of mouth advertising, whatever fine, if you really think it isn't a waste of time. But now you're defending scam systems against attacks from experienced APs? I do not play dice, but did graduate 8th grade and beyond. Anyone with a brain knows your 'non-random' rolls with no attempt at control is nonsense. Fortunately for you, the average American reads at a 6th grade level.
Speed-count is not a good AP method, and it certainly is not something anyone should buy. But it is an improvement in play for a ploppy--and if there is a way to make money off an ultra-weak count, then I see no fault with the capitalism. Simply, the count actually works, and the extreme puffing claims I've read on some random internet sites about the count fall short of fraudulent.
I have seen many players in casinos who have been playing blackjack for 25 years or more on a regular basis, perhaps not 130 days per year, but a great deal nevertheless. They are all, without exception, incompetent. And they are all, without exception, the world's foremost authority on blackjack, in their own mind. So your 25 years means absolutely nothing. It's your expertise that matters. Hostility is coming from the fact that your ideas have weak or no support, which weakens your strongest claims. And when you write nonsense like Sodawater mentions, you lose respect. Not to mention you're advertising a book with little to no technical value (it possibly detracts value). Perhaps it has entertainment value, but it does not seem to be put that way. You seem misleading. Someone mentioned snake oil, and no one reacts kindly to the appearance of that.
If you feel you are so 'angry' about the purchase of material years ago, that you want to bring it up now, as Sodawater appears to be, I would suggest that anger is misplaced. If you want to be angry about that purchase, look in the mirror. ESPECIALLY, stating that you purchased at Barnes and Noble. B & N is basically like a library. You can sit and read all day if you want. If you purchased a product without looking into it....that's on you.
If you have an issue with Frank here...take it up with the Wizard, because it appears Frank has cleared his intentions with Wiz before posting.
Disagreement doesn't have to mean disrespect.
Just to be plain: My books sell many copies. Some over six figures. I am not scrounging for publicity or sales. I've enjoyed coming to this site (and two others) and I am making the comped copy a present to posters, that's all.
Quote: kewljThis thread has taken an ugly turn and taken on an ugly tone. Obviously many in the AP community have some issues with some of Frank's works. No doubt Frank is aware of this. No one is twisting anyone's arm to buy anything. If you don't care for Frank's work, don't buy his work. That's how the marketplace works. If you feel compelled to tell Frank that, you can do so in a respectful way as I believe I did. There doesn't have to be such a nasty tone. :-(
If you feel you are so 'angry' about the purchase of material years ago, that you want to bring it up now, as Sodawater appears to be, I would suggest that anger is misplaced. If you want to be angry about that purchase, look in the mirror. ESPECIALLY, stating that you purchased at Barnes and Noble. B & N is basically like a library. You can sit and read all day if you want. If you purchased a product without looking into it....that's on you.
If you have an issue with Frank here...take it up with the Wizard, because it appears Frank has cleared his intentions with Wiz before posting.
Disagreement doesn't have to mean disrespect.
I think that if someone is promoting themselves as a gambling expert to try to sell books, I think that it's completely reasonable for knowledgeable players to express their opinion that this man is no expert, in order to prevent less knowledgeable players from getting fleeced.
Quote: kewljThis thread has taken an ugly turn and taken on an ugly tone. Obviously many in the AP community have some issues with some of Frank's works. No doubt Frank is aware of this. No one is twisting anyone's arm to buy anything. If you don't care for Frank's work, don't buy his work. That's how the marketplace works. If you feel compelled to tell Frank that, you can do so in a respectful way as I believe I did. There doesn't have to be such a nasty tone. :-(
If you feel you are so 'angry' about the purchase of material years ago, that you want to bring it up now, as Sodawater appears to be, I would suggest that anger is misplaced. If you want to be angry about that purchase, look in the mirror. ESPECIALLY, stating that you purchased at Barnes and Noble. B & N is basically like a library. You can sit and read all day if you want. If you purchased a product without looking into it....that's on you.
If you have an issue with Frank here...take it up with the Wizard, because it appears Frank has cleared his intentions with Wiz before posting.
Disagreement doesn't have to mean disrespect.
I hope I wasn't personally disrespectful. If I was, it was not my intention, as I wish this person no ill will. In fact, I'd like to mention, I hope many ploppies buy his books.
But I have to generally disagree with you, Kewlj. Sodawater's gripe is legitimate. Look at how it was addressed. Frank clearly defends the system. Whether or not Frank cleared his intentions is not at issue. He obviously is authorized to post, because a moderator would have stopped it by now if he was not. You seem to be saying that he must receive acclaim or silence, but no criticism. I doubt this is what the Wizard had in mind.
What does Barnes and Noble have to do anything? It's Sodawater's fault because he bought a book at a bookstore, of all places? It's his fault because he didn't read the book before buying it? That doesn't even make sense. The book he bought was by this author. That's why he brought the issue up, and asked if Frank still holds those beliefs. He does. They are voodoo, not AP, which is the heart of the issue. Credibility.
I didn't know Frank had anything to do with the Speed count. Although useless to the AP, it seems a marketing success--and it's not a sham, it works. So, I think he knows a little about what he's doing, business-wise. But no, he is not a helpful source of information, like Wong or Grosjean or Schlesinger. For me personally, the Wizard and Schlesinger were the most important people...the Wizard to begin, and Schlesinger when becoming advanced. To pretend your ideas are important too, doesn't earn any respect. And anyone has a right to discuss this with examples, I would think. He's advertising on a gambling forum.
And thanks, Wiz, for allowing Frank to be part of this Rabble and at the same time mention his works here.
Quote: kewljThis thread has taken an ugly turn and taken on an ugly tone.
Quote: FrankScoblete
I am not quite sure why there is such hostility towards me but que será será.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI think that if someone is promoting themselves as a gambling expert to try to sell books, I think that it's completely reasonable for knowledgeable players to express their opinion that this man is no expert, in order to prevent less knowledgeable players from getting fleeced.
If you look up "que será sera" in a French-English dictionary, the translation is: "1. Every roll is random 2. Every spin is random." It's ugly in my opinion to present any theory or approach to either craps or roulette that does not acknowledge this.
Maybe if you could throw a pair of dice with the exact same velocity, spin, force, whatever, and have them land in the exact same way on the exact same surface, you could duplicate the result, or predict some limited outcomes that you could exploit. I don't know craps, so maybe there are some obscure bets or sequence of bets that improve your odds. And maybe the return on some craps wagers are closer to even than others.
Roulette's a whole other story.
Who can possibly argue that there is any system in roulette that can overcome, pardon my French, que será sera. True, a prolonged analysis of one, single wheel could perhaps uncover a structural or physical defect in THAT WHEEL'S mechanism. Would that provide an edge anywhere else other than at that one wheel, for only so long as the casino did not discover it for themselves? Could any such a defect POSSIBLY apply to all of that wheel's brothers and sisters, manufactured by the same company, without that defect, again, being discerned by someone else before some "expert" author wrote about it? Where are we? At Rick's place in Casablanca?
We all know better. We might buy such a book, but solely for its comedic value. And I personally would not have any respect for someone if I thought they were trying to sell such demonstrably foolish ideas as those of an expert. If that's ugly, well, I'm not the one painting the pictures.
I never said there is a betting system that can overcome any random game, much less roulette. In my roulette book which was published a long, long time ago I do go into the "bias wheel" idea and explain how to exploit such IF you can find them. My basic strategy for roulette (and all random games) is this: Reduce the number of decisions you play. Anything that does that is better for the player. If you can play outside "even-money" bets in roulette games with surrender those are the games you play. I am not sure why roulette is even being mentioned in these threads.
For the basic strategy player at blackjack, the same holds. You are playing against a one-half (slightly more or slightly less) house edge. So you want to do the opposite of what a card counter does. You want shallow cuts. You want the best rules. You want a full table. You want to take your time making your decisions. Card counters want deep cuts above all else and they'd like to play at tables that are not full.
Now, dice control is an entirely different matter. On this I state without question that skilled shooters can control the dice. I think the word "control" might be throwing people because they think of "control" as what Annie Oakley did. When you pass the three SmartCraps tests you are aware that you are dealing with small changes in the random probabilities and accordingly you must make the correct bets based on your edge. If you fail the SmartCraps tests you have no axis-control. If you are using the SRR as your gauge, after thousands of rolls if you aren't seeing an SRR over 6.3 you really are in the marginal or simply "you don't have it at the moment" category.
The criticsm of the 5-Count is also misplaced. It reduces the number of random rolls you bet on. Now, if the AP player has no interest in a random game of craps that's fine and that's predictable. I have no interest in that either. But should a gambler who loves to play craps use the 5-Count he will save himself a lot of money over time. If he makes the low house edge bets as well, this gambler is not going to take massive beatings after massive beatings. He'll lose a lot less money over time. This is not magic and it is not snake oil; it is simply a fact.
I do think some of the criticism of my books comes from those who have not read them or from those who have misread them. I remember one review of a book where the reviewer went nuts over a whole bunch of stuff. He finished with calling me various nasty names. Problem was that none of what he was reviewing was in my book --- none of it. Maybe he had read someone else's book and just thought it was mine. I also had a reviewer, a noted blackjack whiz who has faded from the scene, review one sentence of one of my books. There was nothing wrong with the sentence in content or grammar. It was not a strategy sentence; it was more like the sentence you are reading now. I have no idea what that was about.
But I am proud of this: Those of you who perceive yourselves as advantage-players belonging to an "advantage-player community" and share the belief in that circle that I should be disdained have good company with those who make all manner of foolish betting choices (you'll find of these on the craps pages) including trend betting at random games and they disdain me too. They write about their poor betting choices being superior to my advice and they therefore hammer me at every opportunity. Some of these individuals won't even allow me on their web sites. Craps "gurus" hate the 5-Count because they want action; they hate my advice on reducing the number of decisions at blackjack (and other games) because they want action; they believe in mystical forces that operate in the random games they play. In short, these folks believe stuff that just isn't true and they seem to dislike my approach as much as some of the posters in this thread.
No, your "5-count" is really about finding "natural rhythmic rollers," or "controlled dice shooters" who don't even know they are controlling the dice. That's what you were selling and now you're trying to distance yourself from it, because in the light of day here instead of in the pages of your quack book, it's patently obvious how ridiculous this concept is.
Shockingly, your book arrived 48 hours after I took you up on your kind offer. Knock me over with a feather to find it in the mailbox this morning. I'm a couple chapters in. Quite personal, very reflective, and I'm going to assume unless you tell me differently that some of it's tongue-in-cheek. You've already mentioned a couple of things that were helpful from a base-level understanding as well; I may move from semi-ploppie status yet, though that's not really my expectation for this book.
Thanks again.
http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/proof.shtml
Quote: FrankScobleteWell, so much about resting on my previous two posts.
I never said there is a betting system that can overcome any random game, much less roulette. In my roulette book which was published a long, long time ago I do go into the "bias wheel" idea and explain how to exploit such IF you can find them. My basic strategy for roulette (and all random games) is this: Reduce the number of decisions you play. Anything that does that is better for the player. If you can play outside "even-money" bets in roulette games with surrender those are the games you play. I am not sure why roulette is even being mentioned in these threads.
For the basic strategy player at blackjack, the same holds. You are playing against a one-half (slightly more or slightly less) house edge. So you want to do the opposite of what a card counter does. You want shallow cuts. You want the best rules. You want a full table. You want to take your time making your decisions. Card counters want deep cuts above all else and they'd like to play at tables that are not full.
Now, dice control is an entirely different matter. On this I state without question that skilled shooters can control the dice. I think the word "control" might be throwing people because they think of "control" as what Annie Oakley did. When you pass the three SmartCraps tests you are aware that you are dealing with small changes in the random probabilities and accordingly you must make the correct bets based on your edge. If you fail the SmartCraps tests you have no axis-control. If you are using the SRR as your gauge, after thousands of rolls if you aren't seeing an SRR over 6.3 you really are in the marginal or simply "you don't have it at the moment" category.
The criticsm of the 5-Count is also misplaced. It reduces the number of random rolls you bet on. Now, if the AP player has no interest in a random game of craps that's fine and that's predictable. I have no interest in that either. But should a gambler who loves to play craps use the 5-Count he will save himself a lot of money over time. If he makes the low house edge bets as well, this gambler is not going to take massive beatings after massive beatings. He'll lose a lot less money over time. This is not magic and it is not snake oil; it is simply a fact.
I do think some of the criticism of my books comes from those who have not read them or from those who have misread them. I remember one review of a book where the reviewer went nuts over a whole bunch of stuff. He finished with calling me various nasty names. Problem was that none of what he was reviewing was in my book --- none of it. Maybe he had read someone else's book and just thought it was mine. I also had a reviewer, a noted blackjack whiz who has faded from the scene, review one sentence of one of my books. There was nothing wrong with the sentence in content or grammar. It was not a strategy sentence; it was more like the sentence you are reading now. I have no idea what that was about.
But I am proud of this: Those of you who perceive yourselves as advantage-players belonging to an "advantage-player community" and share the belief in that circle that I should be disdained have good company with those who make all manner of foolish betting choices (you'll find of these on the craps pages) including trend betting at random games and they disdain me too. They write about their poor betting choices being superior to my advice and they therefore hammer me at every opportunity. Some of these individuals won't even allow me on their web sites. Craps "gurus" hate the 5-Count because they want action; they hate my advice on reducing the number of decisions at blackjack (and other games) because they want action; they believe in mystical forces that operate in the random games they play. In short, these folks believe stuff that just isn't true and they seem to dislike my approach as much as some of the posters in this thread.
All nonsense. Of course you will lose less money if you spend half your time standing there not placing a bet. Blackjack players call it backcounting or wonging--unlike, your method, it actually has a purpose. What in the world do you need a '5-count' for, other than to pretend it's a system that works? I ran a 100 trillion round simulation for my system, which I found to work better than yours. The player must not go to the casino. That's it. Oh, but you probably thought of that. That's why those questionable comp values are thrown in to make it even more illusory. Your count is completely arbitrary.
You're going to seriously attack AP knowledge, and those who gave you poor reviews? You have no idea why someone would not give your book a positive review, and it is clear they are biased? In my opinion, you are crossing the line between shrewd business and dishonesty. Why is there hostility and disdain again?
