Keep following the crowd, you'll get far.Originally Posted by AussiePlayer
Keep hating also, im glad ive had such an effect on you that you always take some time to negatively comment about me.
Keep following the crowd, you'll get far.
Keep hating also, im glad ive had such an effect on you that you always take some time to negatively comment about me.
Last edited by ZenKinG; 02-16-2014 at 09:38 PM.
Nothing personal my friend... You always criticize any other system if it's not Halves. You are completely blinded with Halves and it does not let you see that there are better systems/skills. If at least you dedicate yourself to playing full time or at least 5 days a week, as many of us, you would realize so many things, but on the contrary, by the conversation that we had long time ago, if things go well, you play 1 or 2 times per month.Keep hating also, im glad ive had such an effect on you that you always take some time to negatively comment about me.
Moreover, I have a question for you: which do you prefer? Looking for a good playing conditions and have an average game (you will never know if you gonna win/lose), or sit in any type of game and kill it anytime/anywhere?? Not too hard to answer, at least thats what I think. Well my friend, that's what Tarzan does all the time...
Last edited by Rudy; 02-16-2014 at 07:45 PM.
Blackjack will test your soul, your character, and the very fiber of your being.
Don Schlesinger.
LOL you're kidding right? I'm blinded by halves? Best system ever? When have I said that in any recent amount of time? How many times have I advocated the hi lo count to all the new users of the site in recent months? Please go pull up those quotes of mine and get back to me. What i dont advocate is using all these simulataneous side counts for an 8 deck game, when there isn't even any scientific evidence that it works. And if it does, why not just play a couple more minutes a session on average with a single parameter count, and you will yield the same results, if not better, because you will also yield less errors using the single parameter.
Please don't ever bring that crap about how i criticize any other system. That was earlier on when i first joined the site and a couple of joke posts here and there but i quickly learned they are all effective. Although they are effective, halves outperforms them all and that's why i continue to use it. Just because i say it outperforms, doesn't mean i think all the other systems are useless. Go ahead, go waste your time with the almighty tarzan count for a shoe game and get back to me with your results. If you have the ability to use the tarzan, you surely should have the ability to learn a stronger AP game with a far greater edge instead of wasting your time with blackjack.
You can tarzan the **** out of any one table, while I backcount two-three tables with a simple count and I will crush your score by the way, good luck. Let me guess what the tarzan advocaters are gonna say now? We can count 2-3 tables also no problem, as long as you put your mind to something anything can be mastered LOL
Last edited by ZenKinG; 02-16-2014 at 09:38 PM.
Why you get angry so fast? LOL Sometimes the truth hurts...
You remind me a lot of Rainmaker, deflecting the OP questions in any single new thread, without reason.
I'm not a Tarzan's Count user, but at least I don't criticize. It's like I started to criticize someone who uses a .56 PE and .72 IC system, slightly outperformed by ZEN, obviously, is nonsense.
"You can tarzan the **** out of any one table, while I backcount two-three tables with a simple count and I will crush your score by the way, good luck."
My score? Playin 48 HOURS PER YEAR? You have to play purple to crush my score in 48 hours. I play almost 60 hours in 2 weeks... but thats not the point Mr. Multitabler, the point is to get the best EV in ANY, ANY, ANY type of game. Whyle you are backcounting 10 tables or more (you got amazing skills btw, and your eyes perhaps should be much bigger than the eye in the sky) waiting to catch a positive count, there is another person with the "almighty count" joinin any table at anytime ready to kill, that my friend is called "wasted time", at least in my lexicon.
Once again, you deflecting the OP question, and look what it has become.
But yea, from now on, whatever you say, you will always right, yea right...
Blackjack will test your soul, your character, and the very fiber of your being.
Don Schlesinger.
Who says i play 48 hours a year? LOL. Also i was making a general point that counting multiple tables is much better and that someone who does will crush a tarzan users score who is playing only one table. Sorry man, it looks like you're the one who misinterprets everything and assumes things to make his point valid.
Me get mad? I'm not the one using bold and caps LOL
Glad you are starting to understandBut yea, from now on, whatever you say, you will always right, yea right...
Last edited by ZenKinG; 02-17-2014 at 10:18 AM.
Playing solely heads-up, Tarzan may easily play over two thousand hands a week ~ light black action.
Back-Counting, you are going to play between 18 and 25 hands per hour, depending on numerous factors.
Based on time invested, I will cast my lot with Tarzan over any quotidian attempts at back-counting.
Counting multiple tables waitin for a good shoe or just sit at any table and kill the game? which do you prefer? Nonsense, and I'm who is misinterpreting...
What you do not understand? Cmon, don't be shy, feel free
Blackjack will test your soul, your character, and the very fiber of your being.
Don Schlesinger.
25 hands that often have to wong out. But is not a problem if you can continue backcounting the other 10 tables in the store.
Blackjack will test your soul, your character, and the very fiber of your being.
Don Schlesinger.
Why is SCORE a part of this discussion. If I remember reading correctly nobody has simmed TARZAN yet.
Anyways, I think something needs to be said about SCORE still.
Standardized Comparison Of Risk and Expectation
# of hands/hr has no effect on SCORE
An assumption is made that Tarzan count has high potential to generate very little heat.
An assumption is made that Tarzan's count is vastly superior to any in print count.
Zenking you said earlier you advocate simpler counts and playing for an additional amount of time to recoup lost EV. This has diminishing returns due to heat.
If ZenFlash's assumption about hands/wk is correct.
Super simple comparison
AOII full index heads up, single deck, H17, 1-2 spread 100$ unit, .86% w/l, avg bet 1.29 units.
129 x .0086 x 2000 = 2218.8$/wk
Why is this even an argument, the only argument that would be valid is that the Tarzan count doesn't exist.
Last edited by muckz; 02-17-2014 at 11:26 AM.
You do realize, hands backcounted counts towards N0 correct. Hands seen/observed when backcounting are the same as playing. We are essentially playing at 0 dollars a hand, but without taking any negative variance playing at a disadvantage. Nice attempt though at backing up your little friend tarzan lool
Last edited by ZenKinG; 02-17-2014 at 12:07 PM.
There is value in knowing that any side counted group is not out of whack. If it is a key card you know your weak index is a lot stronger. You may have a risk averse index play because the correlation is not good so you give up EV to control wild variance. If you knew the "neutral key cards" were at expected amounts you wouldn't need to give up the EV to avert the risk. If they were whacky then you make an exact play given their density. You use risk averse indices so you can give up some EV on some matchups and bet more money at the same RoR. What do you think you would bet at the same RoR if you could keep that EV without the added risk and play an exact index for the "neutral key card density? This is the math of the game. You can either win the same with much lower risk and a smaller spread or have the same risk while betting more which translates into more money. Perhaps you should spend more time learning how everything works than parroting what you here others say.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks