I guess my question is why?
And that is not a question just about this particular claim. Throughout your existence on this forum, you have been a strong proponent of what you call (post #33 this thread) a "complex" approach. Multi-level counts with side counts, large number of play deviation, and now a 3 player team employing different counts, with "coded" communications.
And what has all this complexity gotten you? An average of 30k a year in profits for the last 20 years.
No offense to you, but most of us professional players (I am in my 15th year) average
several times that amount annually employing the complete opposite approach, simplicity.
I think your entire approach is "counter counter-productive" if your goal is to maximize profits, which is my goal. Perhaps your goal is different? Maybe to convince people how special you are (myth/legend)?
A couple examples I would point to just from this discussion / thread: Again, going back to post #33, you talk about one of the players works at "card eating".
No offense, but if I am in a situation where it is beneficial to eat cards to minimize losses, I am not even playing. I am off to my next +EV situation, rather than minimizing losses during -EV situations. Second example is 'cover', which you just mentioned in defense of this approach. Cover is trying to trick pit/surveillance in an effort to hide what you are doing to gain some longevity. In this day and age, cover is less and less effective. The best cover is short sessions, which is to say, don't even show enough information.
The host of this forum, Norm has said things like "there is more than one way to skin a cat" and this is very true. So I am not against, you playing the way you like and you find works for you. I do however, have a continuing problem with the way you seem to be misleading players and members that this "complex approach" is necessary to have success, when so many of us, have enjoyed more success by numbers, using an approach just about opposite of what you constantly promote, simplicity.
There is a poster on this site, really smart guy, you may be familiar with, Three. In post #46 in this thread, he posted the best information I have ever seen him post,
"Simple systems get the money. They have strengths and weaknesses just like every other system" I would pay particular interest to those first 5 words.
Bookmarks