Blackjack Card Count Hoax

zengrifter · Jul 21, 2009

shadroch said:
I say we nail him to the doors of a church and feed him a diet of worms, just like they did to Martin Luther King.

Was that in Birmingham Al? zg

Katweezel · Jul 21, 2009

I am overcome

zengrifter said:
I just broke the Katweezel Code - JSTAT = JESUS

Christ! Does nothing escape the intense jackboot scrutiny of the ZZ Kommandant, no matter how subtley it's hidden? JSTAT, take an early surrender... You've been made. May the Force be with you. Turn that other cheek again, as well. Git out your badge. Hold it high. Your Sacred Mission has a much higher EV than a normal unsacred one. Badge: "I shall overcome."
:1st:

daddybo · Jul 21, 2009

shadroch said:
I say we nail him to the doors of a church and feed him a diet of worms, just like they did to Martin Luther King.

I remember a lot of things about that time...but I don't remember that one

shadroch · Jul 21, 2009

daddybo said:
I remember a lot of things about that time...but I don't remember that one

Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it.

JSTAT · Jul 21, 2009

DeTalores said:
If by uncontested you mean, proven wrong by sims that hi-lo does give the player an edge, then you're right.

You say show evidence!
Then when someone shows a sim, you say "oh that sim program is rigged"
lol.
what kind of evidence do you expect?

I defer to scriptures of blackjack preached by Bishop Arnold Snyder of the First Church of Blackjack. When in doubt, I seek his divine guidance. The Bishop preaches about rigged computer simulations in the Fall 1999 issue of Blackjack Forum. The article called "Battle Of The Babies" written by the holy one states, "It is not difficult for me to set up a computer simulation where the Hi-Lo Count will outperform the Advanced Omega II, even when both both counts are being played accurately and employing the same betting spread. All I have to do is play around with the betting strategies so that Omega II is waiting too long to put its big bets on the table. If I simply raise the true count by one or two numbers where these bigger bets are placed, then Hi-Lo will appear to be a stronger system. In fact, the Hi-Lo is simply being played more aggressively and with a higher risk of ruin."

QFIT · Jul 21, 2009

Anything and everything can be rigged. Does that mean nothing is true?

johndoe · Jul 21, 2009

JSTAT said:
I defer to scriptures of blackjack preached by Bishop Arnold Snyder of the First Church of Blackjack. When in doubt, I seek his guidance. The Bishop preaches about rigged computer simulations in the Fall 1999 issue of Blackjack Forum. The article called "Battle Of The Babies" written by the holy one states, "It is not difficult for me to set up a computer simulation where the Hi-Lo Count will outperform the Advanced Omega II, even when both both counts are being played accurately and employing the same betting spread. All I have to do is play around with the betting strategies so that Omega II is waiting too long to put its big bets on the table. If I simply raise the true count by one or two numbers where these bigger bets are placed, then Hi-Lo will appear to be a stronger system. In fact, the Hi-Lo is simply being played more aggressively and with a higher risk of ruin."

All that means is that those two count systems are very close in performance. And both are well known as good systems.

Bojack1 · Jul 21, 2009

JSTAT said:
I defer to scriptures of blackjack preached by Bishop Arnold Snyder of the First Church of Blackjack. When in doubt, I seek his divine guidance. The Bishop preaches about rigged computer simulations in the Fall 1999 issue of Blackjack Forum. The article called "Battle Of The Babies" written by the holy one states, "It is not difficult for me to set up a computer simulation where the Hi-Lo Count will outperform the Advanced Omega II, even when both both counts are being played accurately and employing the same betting spread. All I have to do is play around with the betting strategies so that Omega II is waiting too long to put its big bets on the table. If I simply raise the true count by one or two numbers where these bigger bets are placed, then Hi-Lo will appear to be a stronger system. In fact, the Hi-Lo is simply being played more aggressively and with a higher risk of ruin."

I really believe you have no idea why you say the things you do. Everything you spout is just regurgitated information from other sources. Whether these sources are reliable or not means nothing to you because you have demonstrated no understanding of what you are saying. When asked for evidence you transfer the conversation to ridiculous outbursts or just nonsensical banter.

As far as the effectiveness of hi lo, I posed this question to JSTAT in a recent chat, "If hi lo is a hoax how can I have had a successful blackjack career for 15 years using it?" His response was that I was nothing more than someone scanning the message boards looking to recruit players for a team and take their money, and that my past posts prove that. Again it is JSTATS limited understanding of which he speaks that does not allow him to enter into any logical discussion on the real pros and cons of his point of view. Basically when cornered he acts like a clown to transfer the responsibility of his opinions and accusations. As far as his accusations go if there is anybody here that I have taken a dime from please come forward. There have been just a few here that I have had the pleasure of meeting and playing with, and everyone has played on my bankroll with no risk of their own money. So please JSTAT do yourself a favor and get yourself straight and informed, even if your opinion isn't popular, if you don't know how do defend it, its nothing more than bullsh*t.

shadroch · Jul 21, 2009

If nobody fed the trolls,eventually they would get the message and go away.

johndoe · Jul 21, 2009

shadroch said:
If nobody fed the trolls,eventually they would get the message and go away.

The trouble is, we already have n00bs confused (and damaged?) by the misinformation JSTAT insists on repeating. I think it's good that his posts are countered, though it's definitely getting tiresome.

shadroch · Jul 21, 2009

QFIT said:
Anything and everything can be rigged. Does that mean nothing is true?

How zen.

Automatic Monkey · Jul 21, 2009

JSTAT said:
I defer to scriptures of blackjack preached by Bishop Arnold Snyder of the First Church of Blackjack. When in doubt, I seek his divine guidance. The Bishop preaches about rigged computer simulations in the Fall 1999 issue of Blackjack Forum. The article called "Battle Of The Babies" written by the holy one states, "It is not difficult for me to set up a computer simulation where the Hi-Lo Count will outperform the Advanced Omega II, even when both both counts are being played accurately and employing the same betting spread. All I have to do is play around with the betting strategies so that Omega II is waiting too long to put its big bets on the table. If I simply raise the true count by one or two numbers where these bigger bets are placed, then Hi-Lo will appear to be a stronger system. In fact, the Hi-Lo is simply being played more aggressively and with a higher risk of ruin."

Tell you what man. Tens counts and ace-neutral counts are valuable tools, and I do research with them all the time.

Why don't you just give me the system tags for whatever system you are promoting? I will optimize it, and I can guarantee you it will outperform High-Low in some situations (and you will have numbers to prove it) and it will do 75% of what High-Low will do in any situation. Then you can talk about your system in a way that will benefit advantage players, without having to talk crap.

aslan · Jul 21, 2009

daddybo said:
I remember a lot of things about that time...but I don't remember that one

I remember Martin Luther nailing stuff to the church door, although it was before my time, but I don't believe he nailed his namesake, MLK. And, yes, a Diet of Worms was involved. I assure you I am telling the honest truth. As has been said, "Here I stand. I can do no other." Although I have left it to you to read between the lines.

MoneyPlays · Jul 22, 2009

Great Pen

daddybo said:
Nope, moo. Jesus only used HiLo in multideck games.. he used the AlphaOmega II (AOII with Ace sidecount) for Single and DD Games. (Look it up in Revelation 22:13) He played all from Beginning to End. (They must have had great pen back then) :laugh:

db

Right daddybo, the great pen hit the high point on the Day of Pentecost and has been steadily decreasing ever since. They had a game in the Upper Room that dealt a double decker down to the last card.

itrack · Jul 25, 2009

Automatic Monkey said:
Tell you what man. Tens counts and ace-neutral counts are valuable tools, and I do research with them all the time.

Why don't you just give me the system tags for whatever system you are promoting? I will optimize it, and I can guarantee you it will outperform High-Low in some situations (and you will have numbers to prove it) and it will do 75% of what High-Low will do in any situation. Then you can talk about your system in a way that will benefit advantage players, without having to talk crap.

That sounds like one hell of a deal! I'd jump all over that JSTAT!

JSTAT · Jul 25, 2009

itrack said:
That sounds like one hell of a deal! I'd jump all over that JSTAT!

Too late, "Blackjack Card Count Hoax" was published on http://www.examiner.com/x-18051-San-Francisco-Blackjack-Examiner~y2009m7d23-Blackjack-Card-Count-Hoax newswire for the whole world to see. Google Stanford Wong on Google News to find it. The censoring of this topic by moving this thread to the Zen Zone from the Card Counting page makes an interesting topic in the future. You can only hope to contain the truth, but can't stop it.

jozef88 · Jul 25, 2009

i think that the never contain the true....

KenSmith · Jul 25, 2009

JSTAT said:
Too late, "Blackjack Card Count Hoax" was published on http://www.examiner.com/x-18051-San-Francisco-Blackjack-Examiner~y2009m7d23-Blackjack-Card-Count-Hoax newswire for the whole world to see. Google Stanford Wong on Google News to find it. The censoring of this topic by moving this thread to the Zen Zone from the Card Counting page makes an interesting topic in the future. You can only hope to contain the truth, but can't stop it.

So you get a free offer for in-depth analysis, and aren't interested. Why aren't any of us surprised.

JSTAT · Jul 25, 2009

KenSmith said:
So you get a free offer for in-depth analysis, and aren't interested. Why aren't any of us surprised.

Staying on topic for this thread is my desire. Automatic Monkey's offer to run my modified Ten Count is a road I'd rather not travel on. Monkey already suggested his findings without knowing the facts. The sim for my count will be done at Cal Berkeley. Cal is able to independently analyze High/Low and Thorp's modified Ten Count. I'd accept its findings.

zengrifter · Jul 25, 2009

JSTAT said:
Too late, "Blackjack Card Count Hoax" was published on http://www.examiner.com/x-18051-San-Francisco-Blackjack-Examiner~y2009m7d23-Blackjack-Card-Count-Hoax newswire for the whole world to see. Google Stanford Wong on Google News to find it. The censoring of this topic by moving this thread to the Zen Zone from the Card Counting page makes an interesting topic in the future. You can only hope to contain the truth, but can't stop it.

Someone, or everyone, please go to this article and give fairly concise authorative
comment to debunk JSTAT's premise. AutoMonk and/or anyone. Ken? Sonny? Can link
back to BJINFO. zg

Blackjack Card Count Hoax

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Member

Administrator

Banned

Banned