jack.jackson
Well-Known Member
Welcome to Bjinfo JSTAT
Dont worry you'll get used to it.
Dont worry you'll get used to it.
Jstatii
- Thread starter JSTAT
- Start date
UK-21
Well-Known Member
Am I right in thinking with this counting system, one must keep the running count of the deck, and three separate side counts for three other cards?
Seems an awful lot of strain on the brain, and I would think this system would need to have very siginificant advantages over hi-lo to justify the extra work and higher risks that go with getting one of the counts wrong - ie overbetting.
Playing Hi-lo is all I need at my gaming level, which is typically the equivalent of $5 or $10. Now if I were a pro/semi-pro, betting £50/£100 per hand, I might be inclined to look at something more efficient (but that's never going to happen). I have considered to returning to use an unbalanced count, but why bother? For me, it'd be the equivalent of keep trading in a car for something marginally more economical when I only drive a few hundred miles a year.
Because of this I've no real interest in spending time making a detailed analysis of this gentleman's system. The fact that it has side-counts means it probably not a good one for the average recreational player who wants to counter the house's advantage, unless of course they have masochistic tendencies.
Each to one's own. If it doesn't look like it's up to much, don't use it. If you're new to all this counting stuff, use something simpler (to begin with at least). I'm a great believer in the adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
On the question of computer simulation, I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to create a program that allocates a unique identity to each of the 312 cards in a shoe, random shuffles and then varies the bet amount dependent on the remaining composition (312 less specific cards dealt and cutting off the last 78 cards). This would settle the debate once and for all. In the absence of a ramp, quarter Kelly betting could be assumed, although with the side counts it isn't easily obvious how big the advantage actually is when it turns up.
Just a few thoughts.
Seems an awful lot of strain on the brain, and I would think this system would need to have very siginificant advantages over hi-lo to justify the extra work and higher risks that go with getting one of the counts wrong - ie overbetting.
Playing Hi-lo is all I need at my gaming level, which is typically the equivalent of $5 or $10. Now if I were a pro/semi-pro, betting £50/£100 per hand, I might be inclined to look at something more efficient (but that's never going to happen). I have considered to returning to use an unbalanced count, but why bother? For me, it'd be the equivalent of keep trading in a car for something marginally more economical when I only drive a few hundred miles a year.
Because of this I've no real interest in spending time making a detailed analysis of this gentleman's system. The fact that it has side-counts means it probably not a good one for the average recreational player who wants to counter the house's advantage, unless of course they have masochistic tendencies.
Each to one's own. If it doesn't look like it's up to much, don't use it. If you're new to all this counting stuff, use something simpler (to begin with at least). I'm a great believer in the adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
On the question of computer simulation, I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to create a program that allocates a unique identity to each of the 312 cards in a shoe, random shuffles and then varies the bet amount dependent on the remaining composition (312 less specific cards dealt and cutting off the last 78 cards). This would settle the debate once and for all. In the absence of a ramp, quarter Kelly betting could be assumed, although with the side counts it isn't easily obvious how big the advantage actually is when it turns up.
Just a few thoughts.
I'm just telling it like it is. You're a complete and utter fraud, and have been not only promoting a bogus system, but you've also claimed that proven systems like hi-lo don't work. You've also claimed that sims don't accurately reflect casino play. (?!)JSTAT said:
This is amusing for most of us that know better, but some newbies may fall for your BS, and it's important we prevent that from happening.
I just watched your 6 deck video, and after you shuffled the deck for the second time(around 2:30) you got the count wrong on the first shoe. If you have been doing this since the 90's, wouldnt that be something fairly easy to at least get right
If 1 hand were to sum up JSTATII as a whole, it would be the hand where you got a joker in your first video. Thats high quality.
If 1 hand were to sum up JSTATII as a whole, it would be the hand where you got a joker in your first video. Thats high quality.
Last edited:
1357111317
Well-Known Member
And that right there is how JSTAT's count rules all counts. It reckons the Jokers. Without counting the jokers you are missing out on a 3% advantage.itrack said:
It just keeps getting better! after i watched your video on youtube, I read some of the comments that you posted...
Moviemakerjjcasino (1 month ago) Show Hide Marked as spam Reply
I am JSTAT and named the Ten Count for myself. Hi-lo is faulty because Julian Braun bungled the combibational analysis of Harvey Dubner's high/low count in Thorp's "Beat The Dealer". Braun did not take out the 7,8,9's from the deck. The 21 experts don't use hi-lo, it is only for the stupid. Hi-lo is the simple way to lose your shirt LOL
Moviemakerjjcasino (1 month ago) Show Hide Marked as spam Reply
Hey young and dumb. My count is named JSTATII and it can be proven with a calculator. Hi-lo CANNOT be proven with a calculator.
here is one of the many suckers of the Jstatii
Sephirothlives666 (7 months ago) Show Hide 0 Marked as spam Reply | Spam
o ok, thanks. i understand. this is all rly basic math. if you rly wanted to make alot of money and predict the cards almost exactly you would need to use calculus.
:laugh:
Moviemakerjjcasino (1 month ago) Show Hide Marked as spam Reply
I am JSTAT and named the Ten Count for myself. Hi-lo is faulty because Julian Braun bungled the combibational analysis of Harvey Dubner's high/low count in Thorp's "Beat The Dealer". Braun did not take out the 7,8,9's from the deck. The 21 experts don't use hi-lo, it is only for the stupid. Hi-lo is the simple way to lose your shirt LOL
Moviemakerjjcasino (1 month ago) Show Hide Marked as spam Reply
Hey young and dumb. My count is named JSTATII and it can be proven with a calculator. Hi-lo CANNOT be proven with a calculator.
here is one of the many suckers of the Jstatii
Sephirothlives666 (7 months ago) Show Hide 0 Marked as spam Reply | Spam
o ok, thanks. i understand. this is all rly basic math. if you rly wanted to make alot of money and predict the cards almost exactly you would need to use calculus.
:laugh:
callipygian
Well-Known Member
d(fools)/dt = k * (YouTube video views) + JSTATitrack said:
zengrifter
Banned
We are easier and more open minded, yes? zgPrinceDragon said:
zengrifter
Banned
FLASH1296 said:
And, they got it from Francesco and Uston who got it from Revere. See ZGI. zg
zengrifter
Banned
Z:laugh::laugh::laugh:Gitrack said:
PrinceDragon
Well-Known Member
easier??? what exactly does that mean?zengrifter said:
more open minded...I'd say yes,cuz this site had alot more young folks than the other site.
My point is...We aren't stupid!!!
P.D.
JSTAT
Banned
This group is a joke. I have been a member of Stanford Wong's BJ21.com since 1997. I am a Green Chip member. Wong's community is mature and much information is exchanged. I debate my count with real blackjack experts on Wong's site. This site appears to be hijacked by twentynothings who are amateurs. Before Wong, I belonged to the USENET newsgroup recreational blackjack. It was destroyed by a cut down artist named Doug Grant. Grant ran a blackjack school and was disgrunted by its demise. If Grant were here, he would call this site "Con Man City". Grant was the master of put downs and was voted USENET's "Kook of the Year". I've suffered insults from the master Doug Grant, you guys can't come close to him. Try my Ten Count and ask me questions about it on my blog on My Space.zengrifter said:
JSTAT
Katweezel
Well-Known Member
It's a SIN
You were taken to task for making two ludicrous boasts then: "I am the king of Blackjack" and "I am the world's most feared card counter."
You don't seem to be making those boasts here, just yet... Have you come down a peg or two? :cat:
Back in October last year, you claimed (on BJFonline) that you were a member of Surveillance Information Network (SIN) in Las Vegas. Stalker checked and they had gone out of business or something. You were hawking this same tired stuff over there then, and dodging the same tough questions there, as well. Nothing much has changed. Now you are doing your rounds here, to stir the pot or something.JSTAT said:
You were taken to task for making two ludicrous boasts then: "I am the king of Blackjack" and "I am the world's most feared card counter."
You don't seem to be making those boasts here, just yet... Have you come down a peg or two? :cat:
standard toaster
Well-Known Member
This is the 7th time i have asked how it works...betting strategy, indicies... any other info... if you cant answer can we please end this and close the threadstandard toaster said:
standard toaster
Well-Known Member
If you wont answer my questions here dont bother! Why do i need to go on a childrens website to learn about something thats not as sucessfull as anything hereJSTAT said:
JSTAT
Banned
http://moviemakerjjcasino.weebly.com/index.htmlKatweezel said:
The above link is my webpage my nephew made for me. He created the "King of Blackjack" for me and I went along with it. I was fliered in 1997 by the NYNY surveillance department for winning only $5000 in 13 hours play. I played six deck and spread $25-$250. I knew this because the a MGM told me that I just played at the NYNY. Las Vegas had a network called Surveillance Information Network(SIN) and advantage players pictures were transmitted to all the members. This included most of the strip. Even if SIN does not exist today, my picture is in most of the strip's FRS software even today. My Ten Count sometimes resembles hi-lo sometimes and surveillance uses hi-lo for skills checks. My revenge is to spread the word about JSTATII to give the casino industry an extra headache.
JSTAT
standard toaster
Well-Known Member
JSTAT said:
You still havent answered the questions...
1. whats your betting ramp/structure
2. What are your indicies
3. How do you use the ace sidecount to your advantage?
4. Can you prove why hi-low is no good?
5. You did all the math so what is your ev ror and all that stuff
JSTAT said:
And yet you want to play blackjack for 12 straight hours at the Bellagio with me to prove to me your system is valid. You make no sense. By the way, I have never, or ever will, play any casino 12 straight hours. Not only would they not let me, but I care not to draw that kind of attention to myself. Not to mention that short a period of play really proves nothing. Just like you winning $1500 in a shoe playing at home. A gambler with no advantage could very easily do the same with no outrageous claims needed. So as to your "duel", I'll pass. It seems you need to get a better grasp on the reality of the game. My offer still stands to teach you some real techniques if you get the urge to stop making videos and start making money.
1357111317
Well-Known Member
6:30, You had a A,4 and the dealer showed a 2. You stood. You can say what you want about that but that immediatly disqualifies you from being an AP.JSTAT said:
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
On My Purchase of Hi-Opt II
JSTAT,
You have a lengthy thread on BJ21.com re: purchasing Hi-Opt II
Here is what I posted there:
I purchased Hi-Opt II some years ago.
It is only a handful of (photocopied) pages stapled together.
It barely acknowledges anything but the Single Deck game.
Many of the indices are suspect, to put it mildly.
There is almost no discussion at all re: the use of the Ace Side Count for making playing ENHANCED playing decisions on most double downs and splits.
You have the tags. We all do. That is simple enough.
Just use "S.B.A." or "CVXC / CV Data" to sim' sets of Indices.
You will do better by far than following the old published data.
This is not too hard to understand.
JSTAT,
You have a lengthy thread on BJ21.com re: purchasing Hi-Opt II
Here is what I posted there:
I purchased Hi-Opt II some years ago.
It is only a handful of (photocopied) pages stapled together.
It barely acknowledges anything but the Single Deck game.
Many of the indices are suspect, to put it mildly.
There is almost no discussion at all re: the use of the Ace Side Count for making playing ENHANCED playing decisions on most double downs and splits.
You have the tags. We all do. That is simple enough.
Just use "S.B.A." or "CVXC / CV Data" to sim' sets of Indices.
You will do better by far than following the old published data.
This is not too hard to understand.