Hypothetic legal advice

and everyone remember, the conditions to apply these theories are slim. you need to find a table by yourself, at a low limit amount, and have no one enter the game without your permission, unless you know how to stay on track for more than one person, which is only possible if you can control the amount of cards taken by that person AND the dealer. When you are by yourself it is easier because you have more control of how many cards are taken, unless the dealer takes the wrong amount of cards.

Heatmap, even if the shuffle master is set to have the house win, and you are able to alter the position by one, that won't even last long. Basic strategy for the Player is different than for the house. If you get an 88 against a dealer seven you will split. If the dealer gets an 88 the dealer will hit. Have you thought about this in your analysis? Will this change the entire sequence of cards coming up?

Quote: beachbumbabs

Yeah, I disagree with this assessment. He has offered to meet anyone who wants in person and share his observation. I don't know the value of his insight, but he doesn't seem to be lying. I've spoken with him a little via PM. Can't vouch for it, but I think he's making an honest effort of sharing this without spoiling it by just blurting here.

At best, it's too early to suggest it's a lie. And it does not seem to be a scam or system sale. Remains to be seen.

You're too nice. There is without a doubt no substance to these baseless "claims." Even without his epic failure of the "dear shufflemaster" thread, it's painfully obvious there's nothing here.

Quote: SOOPOO

Heatmap, even if the shuffle master is set to have the house win, and you are able to alter the position by one, that won't even last long. Basic strategy for the Player is different than for the house. If you get an 88 against a dealer seven you will split. If the dealer gets an 88 the dealer will hit. Have you thought about this in your analysis? Will this change the entire sequence of cards coming up?

yes i have, and the splits and the fact that we do play different allows the cards to be pulled into a different direction so to say. these are points in the deck where it says if whatever player splits here we do not have a dealer, and you will go into territories where you shouldnt have gotten specific cards had you not split. You are very keen. I dont do splits because of this. Okay that last statement is a lie i cant help myself splitting aces. But i play as if i were the dealer anyways. When you dont split there is very little to differentiate you and the dealer at that point. GOOD CATCH this is a key part of my strategy

I will keep responding, but I think your premise is 100% incorrect. The likelihood that shuffle master has built a product that would require a human being to push some sort of button To cheat of the players is just too far-fetched. If this was so, you don't think there would be a single one of these humans that would have turned the company in?

I just thought of something else. What percent of players actually play basic strategy accurately enough that this could work? There
I just thought of something else. What percent of players actually played basic strategy accurately enough that this could work? There are so many holes in the theory

Quote: SOOPOO

I will keep responding, but I think your premise is 100% incorrect. The likelihood that shuffle master has built a product that would require a human being to push some sort of button To cheat of the players is just too far-fetched. If this was so, you don't think there would be a single one of these humans that would have turned the company in?

I just thought of something else. What percent of players actually play basic strategy accurately enough that this could work? There
I just thought of something else. What percent of players actually played basic strategy accurately enough that this could work? There are so many holes in the theory

i dont think there is a button. Although if you read my theory on modern day roulette wheels you might think otherewise. Which this is the real reason i went to blackjack. The shoe is static. I can only affect the present when playing. and i cant affect the past.

The holes exist because there is single correlation that im leaving out on purpose. The theories presented up to this point DO have holes in them because they DID have holes in them and i was LUCKY when i did win. But when i was losing i still noticed the pattern. im not lying about this NOT being a holy grail. ive stated before that IF you assume there is a track, and that there is a "right" or wrong to be on, you actually have a better chance of not manipulating the deck because you would have won in the first place.

this theory is very volatile. its volatile because they have different ways of actually controlling : who wins or loses next by the amount of cards taken. sometimes my predictions are wrong because a "winning" card is actually a losing card for one person in the round.

Quote: heatmap

i dont think there is a button. Although if you read my theory on modern day roulette wheels you might think otherewise. Which this is the real reason i went to blackjack. The shoe is static. I can only affect the present when playing. and i cant affect the past.

The holes exist because there is single correlation that im leaving out on purpose. The theories presented up to this point DO have holes in them because they DID have holes in them and i was LUCKY when i did win. But when i was losing i still noticed the pattern. im not lying about this NOT being a holy grail. ive stated before that IF you assume there is a track, and that there is a "right" or wrong to be on, you actually have a better chance of not manipulating the deck because you would have won in the first place.

this theory is very volatile. its volatile because they have different ways of actually controlling : who wins or loses next by the amount of cards taken. sometimes my predictions are wrong because a "winning" card is actually a losing card for one person in the round.

Yikes. You're making a doubter out of me with this last. You've been ambiguous enough that I didn't realize you think the machine is stacking the deck.

Doesn't mean you haven't found some flaw or weakness, but deliberate programming that cheats the players? Hundreds, if not thousands, of people would have to know that was happening without anyone telling. SHFL would be risking billions in capital and revenue. That's Billions, with a B, to scrape another percent or two off red-chippers. That is simply not happening.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Yikes. You're making a doubter out of me with this last. You've been ambiguous enough that I didn't realize you think the machine is stacking the deck.

Doesn't mean you haven't found some flaw or weakness, but deliberate programming that cheats the players? Hundreds, if not thousands, of people would have to know that was happening without anyone telling. SHFL would be risking billions in capital and revenue. That's Billions, with a B, to scrape another percent or two off red-chippers. That is simply not happening.

i dont think i ever mentioned a button stacking the deck, but distributing the wins and losses equally - maybe. but why else would i try to get to a position where in once instance i know was for the dealer if i didnt think i could get an advantage. i like blackjack because i dont believe anything besides me - if im playing alone with the dealer - can manipulate the deck in any way. ive always suggested for people to play blackjack based on that simple premise. Also its one of the only "games" of skill.

And listen, i need you always to be doubting. I dont want you to believe me because I dont believe what Im seeing, which is why I am constantly improving the method. This method does not yet have a high enough prediction rate for me to tell anyone because right now the embarrassment of telling you guys i might have something is far less than the embarrassment had i tried to release the first version, which was actually a horrible example and quickly lost grip of the winning track.

Quote: heatmap

this theory is very volatile. its volatile because they have different ways of actually controlling : who wins or loses next by the amount of cards taken. sometimes my predictions are wrong because a "winning" card is actually a losing card for one person in the round.

Quote: heatmap

Okay guys, so lets just assume that I have found a way to not predict, but tell you exactly when you will win, or when the dealer will win.

Which one is it?

Quote: TomG

Which one is it?

ive been reviewing this in my head as well i will not deny my contradictive statements, which is why now that youve brought it up ill redefine what im saying.

It means that I believe you will be placed on what is considered a winning position AT FIRST. Not that you will necessarily win. I also want to reiterate how i believe there is always a last chance for the dealer. The way I envision this so called "track", is quite absurd actually. The losing card - which is guessed to be a losing card by me, is actually a winning AND losing card most of the time. Ill tell you i THINK that they do this by placing you and the dealer one card away from each other, and if you hit it will make you bust, but for the dealer it would have created a winning hand.

Your hands end up being a number N, and then they copy that number, and subtract 1 from it.

every 4 cards follows this pattern. For example, you have a 14 and the dealer shows a 3, you hit and an 8 comes out, dealer flips the card to show a 13, and had you not hit or stayed the dealer comes out on top no matter. This situation happens too much for me to believe its not planned IMO.

Quote: heatmap

This situation happens too much for me to believe its not planned IMO.

You’ve studied this extensively so why not just tell us what the exact rate of this happening is? And how does that compare to shoe and pitch games?

This might be the stupidest thread in the history of this forum.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Yikes. You're making a doubter out of me with this last.

What took you so long?

Quote: heatmap

every 4 cards follows this pattern. For example, you have a 14 and the dealer shows a 3, you hit and an 8 comes out, dealer flips the card to show a 13, and had you not hit or stayed the dealer comes out on top no matter. This situation happens too much for me to believe its not planned IMO.

Think hard about your last sentence. It is just a situation that you NOTICE and make a note in your head. If the dealer hits a 16 and draws a 10 it seems normal, you don't notice it. But every time the dealer draws that 5 when he hits a 16 you NOTICE it! If you actually RECORDED the last 13000 times a dealer hit a 16 he draws a 5 just slightly more than 1000 times, the slightly more being because most 16's don't include a 5. The 12000 times he doesn't seems like a fair game to you, the 1000 times he does you feel like it is set up against you.

It's up to you now. You have been given enough information by forum members, if you are smart enough, to realize that you are just plain wrong. Or if you are not smart enough you can keep this Bigfoot in your head.

Quote: sabre

This might be the stupidest thread in the history of this forum.

It's truly amazing the lengths people will go on forums for attention. This is an absolute joke.

I don't understand why you can't swear on a gambling forum, but you can spew nonsense that is categorically proven to be false on a gaming forum. It's much worse for unsuspecting or new members to see something like this and actually believe it, then to see someone write a swear.

Quote: heatmap

For example, you have a 14 and the dealer shows a 3, you hit and an 8 comes out, dealer flips the card to show a 13, and had you not hit or stayed the dealer comes out on top no matter. This situation happens too much for me to believe its not planned IMO.

what exactly do you base your IMO on?
is it any type of math that one can calculate?

or you go by your gut feeling that would always stand up in any court of law in the USA?
****
in other words
this is the same (exactly the same)
as rolling 3 dice and getting a 9,10,11 or 12 most times, and it should NOT
because
This situation happens too much for me to believe its not planned IMO.

this is fuuuunnnnny
thanks for the great laugh

I knew my dice were messing with me (3d6 with rounded corners)

that you for sharing!
"LEGAL ADVICE"
Sally

Quote: heatmap

ive been reviewing this in my head as well i will not deny my contradictive statements, which is why now that youve brought it up ill redefine what im saying.

It means that I believe you will be placed on what is considered a winning position AT FIRST. Not that you will necessarily win. I also want to reiterate how i believe there is always a last chance for the dealer. The way I envision this so called "track", is quite absurd actually. The losing card - which is guessed to be a losing card by me, is actually a winning AND losing card most of the time. Ill tell you i THINK that they do this by placing you and the dealer one card away from each other, and if you hit it will make you bust, but for the dealer it would have created a winning hand.

Your hands end up being a number N, and then they copy that number, and subtract 1 from it.

every 4 cards follows this pattern. For example, you have a 14 and the dealer shows a 3, you hit and an 8 comes out, dealer flips the card to show a 13, and had you not hit or stayed the dealer comes out on top no matter. This situation happens too much for me to believe its not planned IMO.

There is an obvious reason you are losing. A family member has put a curse on you. This happened to my Uncle Tunoses also.