Question

[InPlay]

Perhaps Mr.M is referring to ASM's and not CSM's?

I think WE know the difference but does he. His whole story reads like a cheap novel. When you don't know your story you trip along the slippery slope and brother has he tripped.

 

[Mr.M]

I think WE know the difference but does he. His whole story reads like a cheap novel. When you don't know your story you trip along the slippery slope and brother has he tripped.

Go **** yourself you stupid piece of ****. You're a ****ing douchbag. Don't reply to my posts you dumb ****.

Continous shuflle machines

CSM, There is more than one way to say something, or did they teach you that at retard school.

 

[InPlay]

Go **** yourself you stupid piece of ****. You're a ****ing douchbag. Don't reply to my posts you dumb ****.

Continous shuflle machines

CSM, There is more than one way to say something, or did they teach you that at retard school.

At least we have pointed out the difference for you between ASM and CSM so for when the next time you pop up under another alias with a fictional story it will not trip you up. Be sure to use that DISCLAIMER that has been provided to you.

 

[mathman]

I've been quietly watching this develop since the beginning and quite frankly I have my doubts also. Right from the beginning some statements were made that I thought didn't add up. Early in his posts he made the statement that his house didn't back off players while they were losing, this simply is not true. Many years ago I was playing at a sister property to the one he claims to have worked at. I had a short, bad run and went quite a bit backwards, that is when I got tapped on the shoulder because they didn't want to give me a chance to get it back. He made another claim of a team that used different Id's and were backed off but not trespassed. Again I have to wonder because using a false Id. is a crime and a perfect excuse to trespass someone, especially if they are playing as a team and have been caught before. Then we have the CSM/ASM issue. I have a hard time believing anyone in or around this game does not know that terminology. There were a few more things I don't remember right now but I think you see my point.

This leaves me wondering if this is all nonsense or possibly just a stretch of the truth. I thought a few times while reading all of this that possibly he was a security guard that worked on the floor, not in surveillance. The other thought I had was possibly his room mate was in surveillance and he absorbed a little knowledge from him. Obviously I could be wrong and possibly he is here to help but I can't help but wonder.....JtMM

 

[InPlay]

Thank You Mathman for your point of view. I see I am not the only one. Sometimes it gets lonely on an island.

 

[mathman]

Thank You Mathman for your point of view. I see I am not the only one. Sometimes it gets lonely on an island.

Especially when you know there are sharks in the water!!....JtMM

 

[InPlay]

Especially when you know there are sharks in the water!!....JtMM

Don't forget the sheep.

 

[callipygian]

I see I am not the only one.

There are plenty of things on these boards that I doubt, from claims that Mr. M makes to claims you have made.

Why bother arguing about things that are completely non-verifiable? He claims to have worked security at a particular casino; unless he's going to disclose his identity and hand over his W-2 forms, there's absolutely no way to verify what he says.

If you've been backed off while losing, then so be it. You can't verify that he's never seen someone backed off while losing, and he can't verify that you were losing when you got backed off. It's quite possible that it was store policy not to back people off when losing, but that someone made an exception; it's also quite possible that stores did back people off while losing but the OP knew they were ratholing so he knew they weren't. Maybe he's lying. Maybe you're lying. Maybe you're both lying. Maybe one of you is only mistaken and not lying. Maybe both of you are mistaken and not lying.

Whatever.

 

[Mr.M]

Retards just retards.

 

[Mr.M]

At least we have pointed out the difference for you between ASM and CSM so for when the next time you pop up under another alias with a fictional story it will not trip you up. Be sure to use that DISCLAIMER that has been provided to you.

Dummy, they are the samething, just different ways to say it.

The truth, your'e a gossiper, slander, and a 15 year old teenager with pimples in your ass.

 

[Mr.M]

I've been quietly watching this develop since the beginning and quite frankly I have my doubts also. Right from the beginning some statements were made that I thought didn't add up. Early in his posts he made the statement that his house didn't back off players while they were losing, this simply is not true. Many years ago I was playing at a sister property to the one he claims to have worked at. I had a short, bad run and went quite a bit backwards, that is when I got tapped on the shoulder because they didn't want to give me a chance to get it back. He made another claim of a team that used different Id's and were backed off but not trespassed. Again I have to wonder because using a false Id. is a crime and a perfect excuse to trespass someone, especially if they are playing as a team and have been caught before. Then we have the CSM/ASM issue. I have a hard time believing anyone in or around this game does not know that terminology. There were a few more things I don't remember right now but I think you see my point.

This leaves me wondering if this is all nonsense or possibly just a stretch of the truth. I thought a few times while reading all of this that possibly he was a security guard that worked on the floor, not in surveillance. The other thought I had was possibly his room mate was in surveillance and he absorbed a little knowledge from him. Obviously I could be wrong and possibly he is here to help but I can't help but wonder.....JtMM

I can only speak on my experiences, I have seen them leave a counter alone because they were playing, but if you read all my posts, I have also seen them back off when they see a known counter.

As far as the team play using false Id's, I saw it, lived it, it doesn't make sense to me but I was not the supervisor so it's not my decision but it happened.

Terminology is different in different realms, I never heard of wonging but after hearing the definition I know what it was. Just like you call the deviations index's, I never heard of that, I know it to be called indices.

 

[UncrownedKing]

Dummy, they are the samething, just different ways to say it.

The truth, your'e a gossiper, slander, and a 15 year old teenager with pimples in your ass.

They are certainly not the same thing. And personally slandering someone doesn't make your creditability go up either. ASM is almost the same thing as a hand shuffle, except that it speeds it up a bit.(Automated Shuffle Machine) The cards are still dealt out of a shoe and discarded until about 70% of them are dealt, then reshuffled again. A CSM (Continuous Shuffle Machine) is constantly shuffling the cards, the cards are always random. There is no way to count, because it is like starting a new shoe every round.

 

[Mr.M]

They are certainly not the same thing. And personally slandering someone doesn't make your creditability go up either. ASM is almost the same thing as a hand shuffle, except that it speeds it up a bit.(Automated Shuffle Machine) The cards are still dealt out of a shoe and discarded until about 70% of them are dealt, then reshuffled again. A CSM (Continuous Shuffle Machine) is constantly shuffling the cards, the cards are always random. There is no way to count, because it is like starting a new shoe every round.

And I have always said CSM. We don't have any ASM machines were I worked. I was wrong they are the same then, but com-on use some common sense. I don't people questioning me for who I am, I just tried to share my information with this forum and get some jackoffs starting trouble. So yes I feel I have the right to slander the teenager gossiper, slanders.

 

[UncrownedKing]

And I have always said CSM. We don't have any ASM machines were I worked. I was wrong they are the same then, but comon use some common sense.

Dummy, they are the samething, just different ways to say it.

You said right there that you thought they are the same thing. I was correcting you, again. Common sense says that they are, in fact, different.

 

[Mr.M]

You said right there that you thought they are the same thing. I was correcting you, again. Common sense says that they are, in fact, different.

Aren't, typo. I was wrong, they are different. I have never heard of ASM, so I will step up and admit I was wrong.

The point is my intial post stated CSM NOT ASM. Again the 2 pimple faced teenagers on the forums see some controversy and jump on it because they are gossiping little girls. Inplay with myself and Flash your penis in my mouth Inplay.

 

[UncrownedKing]

Aren't, typo. I was wrong, they are different. I have never heard of ASM, so I will step up and admit I was wrong.

That is much better than the personal garbage. And also doesn't deteriorate the discussion.

 

[InPlay]

There are plenty of things on these boards that I doubt, from claims that Mr. M makes to claims you have made.

Why bother arguing about things that are completely non-verifiable? He claims to have worked security at a particular casino; unless he's going to disclose his identity and hand over his W-2 forms, there's absolutely no way to verify what he says.

If you've been backed off while losing, then so be it. You can't verify that he's never seen someone backed off while losing, and he can't verify that you were losing when you got backed off. It's quite possible that it was store policy not to back people off when losing, but that someone made an exception; it's also quite possible that stores did back people off while losing but the OP knew they were ratholing so he knew they weren't. Maybe he's lying. Maybe you're lying. Maybe you're both lying. Maybe one of you is only mistaken and not lying. Maybe both of you are mistaken and not lying.

Whatever.

At least you have all the whatever bases covered.

 

[InPlay]

There are plenty of things on these boards that I doubt, from claims that Mr. M makes to claims you have made.

Why bother arguing about things that are completely non-verifiable? He claims to have worked security at a particular casino; unless he's going to disclose his identity and hand over his W-2 forms, there's absolutely no way to verify what he says.

If you've been backed off while losing, then so be it. You can't verify that he's never seen someone backed off while losing, and he can't verify that you were losing when you got backed off. It's quite possible that it was store policy not to back people off when losing, but that someone made an exception; it's also quite possible that stores did back people off while losing but the OP knew they were ratholing so he knew they weren't. Maybe he's lying. Maybe you're lying. Maybe you're both lying. Maybe one of you is only mistaken and not lying. Maybe both of you are mistaken and not lying.

Whatever.

You think he is real after posting his knowledge about ASM and CSM. Here is one of his little posts. Mr M says:


Aren't, typo. I was wrong, they are different. I have never heard of ASM, so I will step up and admit I was wrong.

The point is my intial post stated CSM NOT ASM. Again the 2 pimple faced teenagers on the forums see some controversy and jump on it because they are gossiping little girls. Inplay with myself and Flash your penis in my mouth Inplay.

 

[callipygian]

You think he is real after posting his knowledge about ASM and CSM.

Whether he is "real" or not is totally irrelevant. I don't trust him any more (or less) than I trust any other stranger on the Internet. As far as I'm concerned, he could be a pimply faced teenager who's never played a hand of blackjack or he could be Stanford Wong trolling under a pseudonym and I wouldn't take any more or less stock in what he posts.

There's a huge information bias in general; the most successful people are reluctant to post their exact methods of success while they're successfully using those methods. Most of what you read about blackjack comes from failures, rejects, the outdated, the disgruntled, egomaniacs, or liars. If you can't verify something yourself, you can either choose to believe it or choose not to.

Stick to arguing about things you can actually verify - e.g. what draws more heat, X or Y - and don't waste your time arguing about things you can't - e.g. did he really deal from 1994-2001.

 

[InPlay]

Whether he is "real" or not is totally irrelevant. I don't trust him any more (or less) than I trust any other stranger on the Internet. As far as I'm concerned, he could be a pimply faced teenager who's never played a hand of blackjack or he could be Stanford Wong trolling under a pseudonym and I wouldn't take any more or less stock in what he posts.

There's a huge information bias in general; the most successful people are reluctant to post their exact methods of success while they're successfully using those methods. Most of what you read about blackjack comes from failures, rejects, the outdated, the disgruntled, egomaniacs, or liars. If you can't verify something yourself, you can either choose to believe it or choose not to.

Stick to arguing about things you can actually verify - e.g. what draws more heat, X or Y - and don't waste your time arguing about things you can't - e.g. did he really deal from 1994-2001.

That's why I never post anything of value on the net. You probally would be surprised who I am.